Tuesday 18 December 2012

Film Review - The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

 
How do you make a three hour movie using the first third of an average size novel? The question that haunted us all for the exciting, if a little apprehensive, months preceding the release of Peter Jackson’s return to Middle Earth ‘The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey’. Now we have been relieved of our agonising wait, it seems the answer is threefold. One: Take all the moments of heart and vigour and beef them up with some spectacular action, extended tension or enduring warmth. Two: Carefully select information from various appendices to solidify the little plot you have whilst subtly foreshadowing its already hugely successful sequel. Three, bridge the gaps with phenomenal locations and aerial views of Middle Earth’s magical beauty.

In the sense of turning such a small piece of text into a three hour epic, the film was a success. However, next to ‘The lord of the Rings’ Trilogy, it just doesn’t do enough to satisfy the fantasy lover’s thirst. Whether you are Tolkien enthusiast or not, ‘The Hobbit’ was and always will be a children’s novel in which Middle Earth was painted with an adventurous and juvenile tone and where the word “evil” meant little more than a child stealing a biscuit. The difficulty with the movie is that its unsubtle likeness to ‘Lord of the Rings’ evokes similar expectations from its audience which the story was just not written to deliver. Consequently, all innocent sense of adventure is swallowed by the unnecessary dark undertones, preventing the movie from achieving its full potential. The most obvious of these similarities is the plot: A gang of ragtag travellers embarking on a quest across Middle Earth to destroy a villain, encountering snarling orcs, boisterous trolls and pretentious elves, passing through a goblin ridden mountain and arriving at a point of uncertainty to lead us into the sequel. This was too akin to ‘The Fellowship of the Ring’ to avoid subliminal comparisons being made and a sign, I think, that stretching the story into a trilogy is going to have a damaging effect on its reception.
 
In the interest of balance though, the performances of returning characters were exceptional, to the point that they rescued the film from falling quickly into its predecessor’s shoes. Cate Blanchet brought us the gentle playfulness of an unburdened Galadriel, Hugo Weaving brought us a Lord Elrond devoid of doubt and Ian Mckellen returned to his robes boasting ambitions born of adventure rather than necessity. Furthermore, our villain-to-be white wizard Saruman (Christopher Lee) was executed with the same resolute authority but without the underlying malice that he would later adopt. Taking the biscuit though was Martin Freeman, whose portrayal of a returning Bilbo was understated, endearing and an all round delight to watch. Balancing the warmth that Ian Holm brought to the role with the uncertainty and apprehension of youth, Freeman managed to bring us both the Bilbo we know and the Bilbo we don’t know at the same time. Around him, there were also some wonderful performances from new characters, including Sylvester McCoy’s peculiar but lovable Radagast and Richard Armitage’s Stubborn but honourable Thorin.
 
As a fan of the book, one of my greatest fears was the treatment of the dialogue between Bilbo and Gollum. This fear was exemplified by the fact that my favourite characters of ‘The Two Towers’ (Treebeard and The Ents) were disappointingly diluted in the film. However, despite a nervous anticipation, these scenes were to become the highlight of the film. The harmony of Andy Serkis’s disturbed and endearing Gollum paired with Freeman’s chirpy timidity created an exquisite mix of tense and humorous moments, making for an outstanding twenty minutes of cinema. As such, despite the movie’s shortcomings and regardless of whether the three-film breakdown was a wise idea, I have no doubt that Peter Jackson knows where the gold is when dealing with these literary masterpieces.
 
There has been a great deal of negative reception to the higher frame rate used in the movie, and where I don’t think it ruined the movie as some have suggested, I certainly don’t think it helped it. The dry realism that flourishes under such a high frame rate detracted completely from the fantasy, taking the awe-inspiring edge off the plethora of splendid visuals that this movie has to offer. For me personally, this was not disastrous as it fell into the shadow of other aspects including the phenomenal scores of Howard Shore, some of which were fresh and exciting and some of which were familiar, and the exemplary performances from the cast.
 
In all, this film succeeds in bringing Tolkien’s Middle Earth to life once again with wonderfully portrayed characters, captivating dialogue and a grand spectacle. However, Peter Jackson’s aim to recreate the success of its predecessor has doomed ‘The Hobbit’ trilogy to be forever in its shadow. Reading ‘The Hobbit’ and ‘The Lord of the Rings’ are two vastly different experiences which is what made both works so successful and enduring. Unfortunately, this is a trick missed in their journey to cinema and I fear that the final instalment is not going to grant us the same satisfaction as ‘The Return of the King’ did in 2003. In summary, I can’t find any words better than that of Bilbo Baggins himself: “Like butter scraped over too much bread.”
 
7/10

No comments:

Post a Comment