The Hobbit Review: A Great Adventure

In a hole in the ground, there lived a Hobbit…

Just like the “Lord of the Rings” trilogy, “The Hobbit” is absolutely beautiful. It takes full advantage of the raw majesty of New Zealand, once again transforming it into the magical realm of Middle-earth. This movie, along with LOTR, shows exactly why so many cinemaphiles still harrumph at CGI and remain steadfast by the side of scenic backdrops and utilizing physical effects as much as possible and CGI only when necessary. There is simply an indescribable magic to seeing this sweeping scenery and it is blunted by the use of 3D in the film. The use of 3D causes many scenes to end up as having sharp edges, with various parts of the frame looking separate from the rest. While this would seem to be the point of 3D, this is not the kind of movie for it. See this movie in 2D if at all possible.

Set decades prior to the events of “Lord of the Rings,” Martin Freeman plays the role of a much younger Bilbo Baggins, at a time when he is content to keep to himself in his well-furnished hobbit hole. Many characters from the LOTR trilogy reprise their roles, Ian McClellan as Gandalf, Ian Holm as Old Bilbo, Elijah Wood as Frodo, Cate Blanchett as Galadriel, Christopher Lee as Saruman, Hugo Weaving as Elrond, and of course Andy Serkis as Gollum.

Avid readers of the book will be intrigued by the modifications made to the story in the movie version. Without giving too much away, the book was very much “cinematized,” put into a form that would be much more easily consumed by the mass viewing audience. Characters are replaced by others; events are taken out or added from completely different source material. Thankfully, it maintains the purity of the spirit of the book and doesn’t end up watered down and mired by the changes.

Something that was somewhat surprisingly kept untouched was the two songs from the beginning: “That’s What Bilbo Baggins Hates” and the Dwarves’ Song. These songs, especially the former, will be a matter of “If you liked it in the book, you’ll be ecstatic they kept it. If you hated it in the book, you will be groaning.”

The characters of the dwarves may throw off viewers who are not familiar with the book, which is to be expected. There are 13 of them, and many of them even in the book, can be somewhat difficult to distinguish. In the movie, the only ones who are given some characterization are Thorin Oakenshield (Richard Armitage), Balin (Ken Stott), Fili (Dean O’Gorman) and Kili (Aidan Turner). Thorin is very accurately characterized as a stoic and often-curmudgeonly warrior-king. He is young and proud, but still maintains his own nobility. He is a hero, albeit a sometimes-unlikable one. Balin is shown to be Thorin’s faithful friend and closest ally. Fili and Kili are young, reckless, and naïve. The others are essentially just waiting for their cues to grow some personality.

Young Bilbo is played to a T as a no-nonsense, quiet, reversed, Hobbit who doesn’t want to have anything to do with adventures. His inner traveler does begin to shine through as the film progresses, mainly due to his Took heritage. Despite his preference for home and hearth over dragon-slaying and burglary, he maintains his own sense of pride and stubbornness. Near the end of the movie, he shows a desire to prove his merit. The issue though is that, similar to the book, Bilbo only seems to do so after being (unknowingly) provoked by Thorin. While this played well in the novel, this could cause some issues for movie audiences due to the differing mindsets between readers and movie-goers. It remains to be seen how his future accomplishments in front of the company play on the screen.

The Hobbit is a remarkably enjoyable experience. It showcases Peter Jackson’s trademark attention to detail and infinite love of the source material. It is a visually stunning movie, more enjoyable in 2D as opposed to 3D (not to mention cheaper). The characters are colorful and varying in temperament. The movie knows when to be serious and when to have some fun. And there’s no need to have already been well-versed in Tolkien lore to properly enjoy it.

This is a “pick up and play” movie.

So enjoy yourselves. Go off on an adventure.

“The Hobbit,” in many ways, is a new frontier with familiar footing. Peter Jackson’s long-awaited return to the big screen to film the prequel to the epic “Lord of the Rings” saga undeniably treads awe-inspiring new ground.

Charming fantasy creatures and gripping acting aside, the most noticeable aspect of the film is the much-talked-about 48-frames-per-second projection rate, as alarmingly realistic visuals serve to stimulate the senses and fully immerse the viewer in the scene.

Of course, this was the likely intention. Advances this innovative, at least in entertainment, are seldom done without the purpose of attention at least in part. But while all eyes remained on each wispy strand of grass and errant cloth, the mind wavered from the story. This can likely be attributed to one of two factors: either the 48 FPS was just too distracting in all its high-resolution glory or the story took entirely too long to tell – which it did. And this may be the precise split between hardcore Tolkien fans – perhaps the film follows the story almost too closely, placing almost too much emphasis on each scuffle and exchange, and ultimately rendering the result quite slow-moving.

But that’s nit-picking, to be sure, as the film, overall, was marvelously engaging and, more than anything else, charming. It’s nearly impossible to exit any threatre showcasing the latest addition to Tolkien’s film franchise without a thoroughly heartwarming smile plastered to the face of the giddy viewer. Ultimately, that’s worth more than dragon’s jewels or dwarfish gold. That’s truly precious.

-Olga Privman