My Hobbit Letdown: Review

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Letdown

The first installment of film ‚??The Hobbit‚?? camouflages itself deep within the placid darkness of ‚??The Lord of the Rings‚?? trilogy‚??s mountainous shadow.

If you read J.R.R Tolkien‚??s ‚??The Hobbit,‚?? Peter Jackson‚??s cinematic interpretation leaves much to be desired and will have you questioning what the hell he was thinking at times.

The novel itself is frivolous, good humored, and told in a colloquial fashion as if the reader was a child, sitting on Tolkien‚??s knee. And I understand that this was not as dark a story as the Lord of the Rings, but at its core, it still needed to coincide with Jackson‚??s three previous films. This wasn‚??t achieved.

For me it wasn‚??t one of those films that you got lost in. Instead of living vicariously through the characters, I couldn‚??t wait to get home and reread the novel to set everything right again. Frustratingly I could not help feeling that Jackson himself was confused where he wanted to go with the story.

(Spoilers in the following)

There were times where Jackson‚??s script followed too closely to the script, where the end product just didn‚??t translate fluid enough between mediums. The first interactions between Gandalf and Bilbo, the songs of the dwarves, and a few other scenes just felt too staged, for me, even though they were directly out of the book. But I cannot fault Jackson on these parts. I respect his intent to stay true to Tolkien‚??s words and so even though I am a little critical of these aspects in his film, I won‚??t let it bring me too down. After all, I was looking for perfection.

But since Jackson portrayed some scenes so similarly to the novel, it was even more flummoxing when he added completely new scenes and characters. It was as if the audience was being lead down a nicely defined trail and then Jackson took out a machete, started cutting, and in the end only achieved a massive detour. This happened a myriad of times and left me boiling.

There was absolutely no need to add the wizard Radagast into the story. I can think of no other excuse for the director than that he had some quizzical need to further establish that fact that this story preluded the LOTR trilogy. As if we already didn‚??t know! And the fact the Radagast was portrayed as this loony furry completely upended the intrinsic antiquity that was previously established in wizards like Gandalf and Saruman. Jackson could have cut out that whole spiel with Radagast, the stupid rabbit bobsled, and the Necromancer; the flick would have stayed linear, been terse, less confusing, and overall better.

The capricious conflict between Thorin and ‚??the Pale-Faced Goblin‚?? was farcical and selfish on Jackson‚??s part. Nowhere in Tolkien‚??s novel did this happen. Were trolls, wargs, goblins, giants, and Gollum not enough antagonists for him (let alone Smaug)? It seemed to me he was creating some sort of parallel with difference between this Pale-Faced Goblin and Lurtz from the Fellowship of the Ring. Pete, you didn‚??t need it; it wasn‚??t that cool; and you expounded upon a story that didn‚??t need any addition.

Now I‚??m a sucker for aesthetics. The LOTR trilogy was brilliant. Every character was expertly cast and I didn‚??t have any qualms. This was not the case in the first ‚??Hobbit‚?? film. I‚??m not going to break down each dwarf, but while reading the story I always pictured these guys as small, but dense and fierce (sort of like variations of Gimli). Maybe its ignorance on my part, but a bunch of dwarves who looked dissimilar and would not exactly inspire fear in an adversary, was not what I was hoping for.

I don‚??t want to know who had the bright idea of making the voices of the trolls and the goblin king sound like an eclectic group of Transformers, but they need to be admonished. I cringed when I heard Megatron talking to Bilbo. Megatron. Are you kidding me? Where was the ingenuity? And one of the trolls sounded like he was having his crotch vice gripped. I haven‚??t the faintness clue how the team of people who came up with the voice of the Nazgul, the Mouth of Sauron, Gollum, and Saruman got the voices in this flick so incredibly wrong.

The made-up sequence, right before the company arrived at Rivendell, where the dwarves (on foot) were being chased by wargs killed me. First of all, how the dwarves never got caught is beyond me. The wargs seemed to get lost in the labyrinth that was an open meadow. An open meadow. Then, if you look back on that scene, the company got chased through what looked to be parts of the Shire, Rohan, Mirkwood, and the Mines of Moria all in about 45 seconds. There was no continuity with the scenery. And those dwarves, who in Gimli‚??s own words ‚??were not meant for long distances,‚?? still didn‚??t get caught! There was also Elrond and the Elves riding, in what looked to be Rohan, to save the dwarves. Not in the book. Not needed. Finally Gandalf and the dwar
Tucker Bowe
12-14-2012 12:41 PM

Thread Replies

Please log in to participate in this forum.

Deathandtaxes

Ed Jinx

(Continued) To make even Gollum look sexy by comparison.
What is really sad is that with selective editing and the makeover of a few villains it could have been a great movie. The scenes with Gollum were spectacularly done, thorin, bilbo, Gollum, and ghandalf were great actors, and the shots of the dwarves mines were superb. Peter Jackson followed fairly closely to the story. If even just the potty humor was removed it would be a better film.
To conclude, I just have to say that the second movie had better be an improvement.

Dec 28 - 09:19 PM

Deathandtaxes

Ed Jinx

One of the things that I enjoyed the most about the LOTR trilogy was its realism ( as much as you can get from a fantasy realm.) All the characters in the Hobbit had the invincibility of cartoon creatures. Really, would they have survived a troll falling on them? Or the fight between the rock giants? Or the warg attack? In LOTR, if something like that happened, somebody died.and that's the way it should be.
I also have a bone to pick with whoever designed the goblin king and his minions who lived under the mountain. WHY WAS THE GOBLIN KING FIVE TIMES AS BIG AS ANYONE ELSE? And he was a hideous creature that looked like he had giant tumors hanging from his neck! All the problems I had with the pale Orc were forgotten as soon as I saw his ugly mug.
The dwarves were silly (mostly), the trolls were gross, radagast was an insult to wizards everywhere, the pale Orc's prostetic arm made no sense to me, and the goblins twisted faces were enough to make even gollum

Dec 28 - 09:10 PM

Facebook User

Facebook User

THE HOBBIT FUCKING SUCKS ITS A MAJOR LETDOWN FOR ALOT OF PEOPLE THE MOVIE SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM EVERY THEATER AND THE TRILOGY SHOULD BE CANCELLED.

Dec 14 - 02:31 PM

Charles Borner

Charles Borner

Wow. MAJOR bug up someplace dark and poopy-smelling here!
I'd think you'd wait and see the opening weekend returns before declaring it a failure.

As for "cancelled"? The films are already "in the can". And the first one would have to be major *FINANCIAL* disaster to have the rest of them quietly put on a shelf to rot.

The is Peter Jackson we're talking about though. Not Uwe Boll. It's never going to happen.

So relax, take some deep, calming breaths and maybe go get a massage or something.

Dec 14 - 03:16 PM

Thom Stone

Thom Stone

"someplace dark and poopy-smelling here"

the sewer? there's a bug in the sewer?

Dec 14 - 04:46 PM

Zach Wisz

Zach Wisz

geordie probably lives in the sewer.

Dec 15 - 10:27 PM

M B.

M Batman

Man was someone kicking your seat the whole film? You know it's one third of an old book being made into a movie right? The Hobbit leaves so many questions as a book, Tolkien really failed to answer. The Silmarillion was an attempt in its last chapters to explain the connection between the LoTR and the Hobbit. I think Peter does a great job in jerry rigging the two stories together. Perhaps you never saw the cartoon or cared much for Alan Lee's artwork however as times has passed Tolkien's stories have evolved and gotten darker over time.

Dec 14 - 02:09 PM

Thom Stone

Thom Stone

just read your whole review. well said. :)

Dec 14 - 01:56 PM

Thom Stone

Thom Stone

an easier read:

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Letdown

The first installment of film 'The Hobbit' camouflages itself deep within the placid darkness of 'The Lord of the Rings' trilogy's mountainous shadow.

If you read J.R.R Tolkien's 'The Hobbit,' Peter Jackson's cinematic interpretation leaves much to be desired and will have you questioning what the hell he was thinking at times.

The novel itself is frivolous, good humored, and told in a colloquial fashion as if the reader was a child, sitting on Tolkien's knee. And I understand that this was not as dark a story as the Lord of the Rings, but at its core, it still needed to coincide with Jackson's three previous films. This wasn't achieved.

For me it wasn't one of those films that you got lost in. Instead of living vicariously through the characters, I couldn't wait to get home and reread the novel to set everything right again. Frustratingly I could not help feeling that Jackson himself was confused where he wanted to go with the story.

(Spoilers in the following)

There were times where Jackson's script followed too closely to the script, where the end product just didn't translate fluid enough between mediums. The first interactions between Gandalf and Bilbo, the songs of the dwarves, and a few other scenes just felt too staged, for me, even though they were directly out of the book. But I cannot fault Jackson on these parts. I respect his intent to stay true to Tolkien's words and so even though I am a little critical of these aspects in his film, I won't let it bring me too down. After all, I was looking for perfection.

But since Jackson portrayed some scenes so similarly to the novel, it was even more flummoxing when he added completely new scenes and characters. It was as if the audience was being lead down a nicely defined trail and then Jackson took out a machete, started cutting, and in the end only achieved a massive detour. This happened a myriad of times and left me boiling.

There was absolutely no need to add the wizard Radagast into the story. I can think of no other excuse for the director than that he had some quizzical need to further establish that fact that this story preluded the LOTR trilogy. As if we already didn't know! And the fact the Radagast was portrayed as this loony furry completely upended the intrinsic antiquity that was previously established in wizards like Gandalf and Saruman. Jackson could have cut out that whole spiel with Radagast, the stupid rabbit bobsled, and the Necromancer; the flick would have stayed linear, been terse, less confusing, and overall better.

The capricious conflict between Thorin and 'the Pale-Faced Goblin' was farcical and selfish on Jackson's part. Nowhere in Tolkien's novel did this happen. Were trolls, wargs, goblins, giants, and Gollum not enough antagonists for him (let alone Smaug)? It seemed to me he was creating some sort of parallel with difference between this Pale-Faced Goblin and Lurtz from the Fellowship of the Ring. Pete, you didn't need it; it wasn't that cool; and you expounded upon a story that didn't need any addition.

Now I'm a sucker for aesthetics. The LOTR trilogy was brilliant. Every character was expertly cast and I didn't have any qualms. This was not the case in the first 'Hobbit' film. I'm not going to break down each dwarf, but while reading the story I always pictured these guys as small, but dense and fierce (sort of like variations of Gimli). Maybe its ignorance on my part, but a bunch of dwarves who looked dissimilar and would not exactly inspire fear in an adversary, was not what I was hoping for.

I don't want to know who had the bright idea of making the voices of the trolls and the goblin king sound like an eclectic group of Transformers, but they need to be admonished. I cringed when I heard Megatron talking to Bilbo. Megatron. Are you kidding me? Where was the ingenuity? And one of the trolls sounded like he was having his crotch vice gripped. I haven't the faintness clue how the team of people who came up with the voice of the Nazgul, the Mouth of Sauron, Gollum, and Saruman got the voices in this flick so incredibly wrong.

The made-up sequence, right before the company arrived at Rivendell, where the dwarves (on foot) were being chased by wargs killed me. First of all, how the dwarves never got caught is beyond me. The wargs seemed to get lost in the labyrinth that was an open meadow. An open meadow. Then, if you look back on that scene, the company got chased through what looked to be parts of the Shire, Rohan, Mirkwood, and the Mines of Moria all in about 45 seconds. There was no continuity with the scenery. And those dwarves, who in Gimli's own words 'were not meant for long distances,' still didn't get caught! There was also Elrond and the Elves riding, in what looked to be Rohan, to save the dwarves. Not in the book. Not needed. Finally Gandalf and the dwar...

Dec 14 - 01:45 PM

Lenny Brantley

Lenny Brantley

Agree with all of what you say, Jackson got too ambitious on this one and did not follow the feel of the actual book, in addition the added parts trying to tie the books together was ridiculous. Could have been 2 hrs. and a much better movie.

Dec 14 - 01:41 PM

Tucker Bowe

Tucker Bowe

yea i don't know what happened here...here is the review entirely: http://johntuckerbowe3.blogspot.com

Dec 14 - 01:26 PM

Thom Stone

Thom Stone

what's with all the question marks??√Ę??√Ę???

Dec 14 - 01:23 PM

David Tanny

David Tanny

You got cut off, bro.

Dec 14 - 12:57 PM

David Tanny

David Tanny

Good review, by the way. Just wish I could read the rest of it.

Dec 14 - 01:05 PM

Thom Stone

Thom Stone

the rest is here:

http://johntuckerbowe3.blogspot.com

Dec 14 - 01:56 PM

Find us on:                     
Help | About | Jobs | Critics Submission | Press | API | Licensing | Mobile