Well, it's 3:20 Friday morning and I just got back from the midnight release of The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug. Seems like a good time to write a review!
There are no real spoilers in the following review, though my opinion may certainly influence your perception of the movie. Personally I feel that it is better to watch movies without reading reviews as they can unduly affect your enjoyment of the movie. If you agree with me, I'll just let you know my overall rating and you can skip the rest: 2 out of 5.
In a nutshell: I was very disappointed. The second Hobbit film does not live up to the promise of the first one. The number one complaint I had was that it was too absurd. The combat scenes in particular were just ludicrously unrealistic. With only two minor exceptions that I can think of, everything goes exactly right for the good guys. One of them can toss a weapon a few yards to one of the others who will then kill someone and toss it back in enough time for the first guy to kill someone else with it. Honestly, the orcs would have to be TRYING to be that bad at fighting. I know orcs are supposed to be numerous rather than skillful, but there's no way they're that bad (and there's no way the good guys are that good).
Another major complaint is that the characters are no longer likable. Even Bilbo, the hobbit we all know and love, is subject to corruption and shades of darkness. This is a fantastical story that requires a hero for us to be invested in. Due to both the absurdity of much of the movie and losing my interest in Bilbo I found myself not being immersed in the film.
The thing about the Hobbit is that (unlike The Lord of the Rings) the story actually already works pretty well for a movie. It's a hero's quest story with a linear narrative and a clear character arc for Bilbo. Peter Jackson destroyed the linear narrative and took away from Bilbo's story by adding characters and plots that are entirely unnecessary. The romantic subplot is particularly egregious in its absurdity.
There are a few things that I enjoyed in the movie. Smaug is quite good, as is the Master of Laketown (honestly, has Stephen Fry ever done anything that hasn't been excellent?). The Dwarven culture continues to be treated fairly well, but its treatment is balanced out by Jackson's elves, which are even worse than the elves in The Lord of the Rings.
By changing the story and adding superfluous story lines, the movie winds up losing the charm of the book. Jackson's hubris is shameful: it is clear that he thinks he can improve upon the masterful story telling of J.R.R. Tolkien. 2 out of 5 stars.
I agree. The action scenes were just too over the top. What I liked about the LotR movies was that, despite how they could have made the fight scenes absolutely ridiculous (and on occasion they did - I'm looking at you, Legolas), by and large they kept it pretty well grounded. The result was that you felt like you were in a fantasy world that was much like our own. Very gripping, and very immersive.
ReplyDeleteI get that The Hobbit was a more whimsical text than the LotR series and so they're cranking the antics up a notch. But whimsy is not the same as absurd. The book 'The Hobbit' had a lot of wonder about it, but the movies have just left me wondering, "Who thought this was a good idea?" I hated everything about the barrel scene, most especially how weapons that WERE NEVER MADE WITH THE INTENTION OF BEING THROWN WITH ANY DEGREE OF ACCURACY were flying with lethality out of the hands of dwarves and into (or through, in some cases) the chests of orcs. Dwarves that were in barrels. With limited range of motion. Moving quickly. Down white. Water. Rapids. And that was one of my favorite parts of the book. Sad face.
I think there's a pretty big problem with the tone overall as well. It's like Jackson can't decide if he wants the movie to feel like LotR (gritty, realistic, dark) or The Hobbit (silly, fantastic, light). What we're left with is a movie that changes its tone more frequently than I change my newborn's diapers. And I change a lot of diapers.
I did have fun, though. I know one thing most people will complain about are the extra characters and story lines that weren't from the book. I've never been strict when it comes to taking liberties in bringing books I like to film. Books and movies are just different, and as long as the changes make sense I generally don't mind. While I wish Peter Jackson hadn't made The Hobbit a trilogy (thus removing the necessity to have all the extra stuff in the first place), I do think he's done a good job adding stories that don't detract from the main plot and were pretty well integrated. Granted, the original, unchanged text is more straightforward and stands proudly without any of these extras, but Jackson's additions could have been much more non-sensical than they were, especially given the absurdity of the action scenes. I loved the development of Bard, and even though the love story was silly, Tauriel was at least an interesting character who struggled with her feelings and her duty (though she suffered severely from being perfect at everything she did). The development of the necromancer subplot was pretty interesting as well, although it wasn't as well fleshed out as the stories around Bard or Tauriel were.