Peter Jackson's Hobbit - The Critique

[Martinus]

So where to begin it. I enjoyed it. It wasn't too cringe-worthy.

That being said, it had a bit of that Lucas vibe to it, as in being the first movie of a dumbed down pre-quel trilogy for kids.

I know it is a children book but Jackson made too many easy choices, downgrading the entire experience in a way. Only Azog seemed like the real "adult" villain - both the trolls and the goblin king seemed like something out of a fairytale for kids.

Plus too many dei ex machinae - again, probably Tolkien's fault (I read the book so long ago I don't remember details anymore) but having Gandalf save the day time after time got boring rather fast. At least on two occasions (the trolls and the goblins), Bilbo was in a position to do it on his own (with trolls just waiting for normal sunrise to turn them to stone and with goblins because he already had the ring so freeing the dwarves from some prison or something would have worked, story-wise) and it would make for a better story, imo.

I am also not sure about the music - it seemed they took an easy route and reused a lot of the original soundtrack from LOTR. Which is fine as a way to underline continuity and remind people of places they visited with Frodo, but they could have done some variation on the original themes, rather than just reusing them largely unchanged.

I actually liked the scenes that weren't in the original book - i.e. the ones with Radagast and Saruman - the most.

Btw, 3D technology sucks.

[Faeelin]

I can't tell if you're trolling.

[Martinus]

I can't tell if you're trolling.

I'm not. Why would I be?

[CountDeMoney]

but having Gandalf save the day time after time got boring rather fast.

What else is the point of having a wizard around?  About time he started using that shit more often.

[mongers]

Sounds like I might as well wait until it turns up on tv.

[Faeelin]

I'm not. Why would I be?

A lot of your complaints are that a children's book seems like a children's book.

[11B4V]

but having Gandalf save the day time after time got boring rather fast.

What else is the point of having a wizard around?  About time he started using that shit more often.

Based solely on the ring movies, he was a sucky ass wizard.

[Jaron]

Martinus and I discussed this earlier.

My main gripes are:

1) It will be extraordinarily difficult to balance out so many characters. It was rather easy in LOTR because each character was so distinctively different. The exception might be Merry and Pippin. I had trouble telling them apart at first. In the Hobbit, so many of the dwarves are the same character, and their names all rhyming doesn't help. Ultimately, I don't think it will matter because most of these dwarves don't serve a significant role in the book either. They're just filler characters that are impossible to be attached to.

2) The dwarves are either exaggerated conceptions typical fantasy Dwarfs, or appear VERY human. Unlike Gimli, who while serving as comedy relief was still a believable character, I find it hard to think this company could make it out of the Shire, much less back to the Lonely Mountain. Thorin reminds me too much of Aragorn.

3) Although based on a children's book, the problem I had was having been through the mostly serious telling of Lord of the Rings, it is hard to see many of the same characters now engaged in a much lighter tale. For me, the introduction of these elements is similar to the debut of the Ewoks.

4) I somewhat agree with Martinus on the music, but I think it is a nice touch. It made me a bit nostalgic and will be a great element to tie the movies together when people inevitably watch the Hobbit + LOTR back to back. It makes them feel like part of the same series.

5) I felt the pacing was just a bit off. There was a lot in the movie that could have waited for the second or third film. I don't think the characters at this point have even come close to Mirkwood, so it seems odd to begin foreshadowing spiders or Dol Guldur so early. It would have been like showing the orcs in Minas Morgul preparing for war in Fellowship of the Ring.

I would have to say it is mostly enjoyable. I feel like these are mostly small nitpicks that relate more about the artistic direction of the film than the quality of the finished product.

[Tonitrus]

but having Gandalf save the day time after time got boring rather fast.

What else is the point of having a wizard around?  About time he started using that shit more often.

Based solely on the ring movies, he was a sucky ass wizard.

"Wizard fights" often look pretty stupid, and I think are hard to do real well.  The one from Lord of the Rings where Gandalf and Saramaun flung each other around with invisible force felt like a cheap cat-fight with long beards. 

Hell, I think the best movie wizard fight I can recall off the top of my head is probably Lo Pan vs. Egg Chen.

[Martinus]

I liked Gandalf throwing fireballs though.

[Jaron]

I don't remember that part. When did he do that?

[Martinus]

I don't remember that part. When did he do that?

When he started to put these big pine cones on fire and throwing them at Azog and his band.

[Martinus]

I'm not. Why would I be?

A lot of your complaints are that a children's book seems like a children's book.

This is a bullshit comment. These films were never a 100% faithful rendition of the books, and Jackson deliberately took a decision to "adult them up" (like Tolkien wanted, but did not finish, by the way) by injecting scenes from unfinished tales and LOTR footnotes. Doing this, but depicting the troll and goblin sequences in a very child book like manner felt somewhat jarring.

[Martinus]

For the record, I couldn't care less for the films being faithful to the original books, just that they are fun to watch. Having LOTR done first and then coming up with a childish Hobbit trilogy with no effort to rewrite some plots to make them more on par with LOTR makes this a Lucas-like experience for the viewers.

[Ideologue]

I tried to obliquely ask this in the other thread, but neither Faeelin nor anyone else answered, so since there's another thread about this stupid movie, HOW IS THE FORTY-EIGHT FRAMES PER SECOND?