The problem with “The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey” — and it’s a problem many fans have likely foreseen — is that it follows in the Middle-earth-shattering footsteps of a giant. Peter Jackson’s masterfully assembled “Lord of the Rings” films, based on J. R. R. Tolkien’s classic fantasy book series, arguably made for the greatest trilogy to have ever graced the silver screen: staggeringly epic, meticulous in its world-building, showered in Academy Awards and instantly amassing a legion of hardcore enthusiasts, it was a crowning achievement that, for some, was the true “Star Wars” of the noughties. By sheer comparison, this first entry in a three-part adaptation of Tolkien’s more kiddy-friendly “The Hobbit,” while boasting its own thrills and charms, comes up a little short — it’s a hobbit pitted against a giant it couldn’t possibly outmatch.
It’s a comparison that might have been uncalled for if it weren’t for the direct connections Jackson makes between this new prequel trilogy and the earlier films: a wholly unnecessary prologue finds Ian Holm’s Bilbo Baggins and Elijah Wood’s Frodo having a chat in the former’s humble home, while Cate Blanchett, Hugo Weaving and Christopher Lee briefly return in a visit to the opulent Elven outpost Rivendell. Even some of the musical cues are the same: the re-introduction of the Shire is soundtracked by Howard Shore’s whimsical piece “Concerning Hobbits,” and the appearance of the one true “precious” ring is greeted with that ominous string melody from “The Prophecy.”
Indeed, the “Hobbit" series looks set to wander down the same route traversed by “The Lord of the Rings,” regardless of whether or not it is fit for such a lengthy trek: what we are getting once again is a trio of closely released three-hour epics covering a perilous on-foot adventure across the treacherous mountains and thorny forests of the orc-infested Middle-earth (here 60 years younger). What we’re not getting is as compelling a story: in “The Lord of the Rings,” the Fellowship’s quest was necessary in stopping the evil Sauron from gaining ultimate power and turning the land into a post-apocalyptic wasteland; in “The Hobbit,” the quest embarked on by our heroes is merely to reclaim a dwarf kingdom from a pillaging dragon that snoozes in amongst its piles of golden treasures.
Still, while the destination isn’t as pressing this time round, this unexpected journey is always enjoyable, and our travelers make for good company. Our unlikely, 3ft-tall hero is Bilbo Baggins, as played by the always appealing Martin Freeman (“Sherlock”). A pipe-smoking, pointy-eared, hairy-footed resident of the sunnily picturesque village of Hobbiton, the timid Bilbo lives a snug but largely uneventful life that is one day disturbed by wise wizard Gandalf the Grey (Ian McKellen, “X-Men”). Gandalf seeks Bilbo’s help: he requires a burglar to sneak into the Lonely Mountain with him and steal the treasure from the villainous dragon Smaug (that’s pronounced “smowg,” not “smog”), and the pint-sized Bilbo seems an ideal candidate.
Reluctantly, Bilbo agrees to be Gandalf’s burglar, finally venturing out from the comfort of his home to embark on an adventure that may well claim his life. Accompanying them is a band of thirteen warrior dwarves cruelly driven out of Erebor kingdom by Smaug. Flaunting ferocious appetites, bellowing singing voices and boundless energy, these diminutive goofballs are a hairy-faced delight, although differentiating between a few of them proves a difficult task. Leader of the pack is the brooding Thorin Oakenshield (Richard Armitage, “Spooks”), essentially Aragorn but half the stature. As their quest begins, Thorin is ruthlessly hunted by the vengeful pale orc Azog, whose right forearm was lopped off by Thorin’s blade mid-battle.
Their journey, like that of the Fellowship, brings them to sensational set-pieces. In the woods one night they encounter a trio of lumbering, horse-thieving Cockney trolls who develop a taste for dwarf and hobbit. On a mountainside they find themselves in the midst of a tussle between towering giants made of stone, dodging chunks of the mountain hurled by both opponents. In the film’s most bombastic sequence, they escape from an underground cave system, chased by an army of goblins across rickety wooden bridges atop bottomless gorges. Jackson maintains his rousing visual flair in framing these sequences, lending the action an epic scope and a sweeping pizzazz.
But where “The Hobbit” shines brightest is when Gollum, that bug-eyed ex-hobbit, crawls out from the darkness of his cave to engage in a game of riddles with Bilbo. It’s a tense scene, the most suspenseful in the film, as our intrepid little hero takes part in a battle of wits against an instinctively deceptive, clinically schizophrenic creature of the dark. The great Andy Serkis, again voicing the iconic character and providing his every spidery movement, damn near steals the show, and, as stunningly rendered with state-of-the-art special effects, Gollum has never looked so good (well, considering...).
Trouble is, many of these set-pieces feel like needless diversions from the central quest, especially in that aforementioned visit to Rivendell (found nowhere in Tolkien’s book). One senses that Jackson and co-writers Fran Walsh, Phillipa Boyens and Guillermo del Toro are overstretching Tolkien’s original text for the sake of shaping it into the soaring “Lord of the Rings" mould (after 169 minutes, we’ve reached the beginning of chapter seven). Speaking of which, there’s a dilemma at the film’s core: does Jackson want this to be the lighthearted, rompish “The Hobbit” of Tolkien’s story, and thus grant the film its own identity, or does he want to stick to the grim, gritty violence of “The Lord of the Rings”? The Kiwi director, I’m afraid, fails to make a decision, resulting in slapstick shenanigans and graphic beheadings occurring within mere seconds of each other (and, as in one poor goblin’s delayed decapitation, at the exact same time).
What holds it all together, the magnificent production values and Jackson’s eye for stunning spectacle aside, is Freeman. The British actor’s good-natured charm and uncanny knack for deadpan comic delivery make for a brilliant Bilbo Baggins whose growing courage and lion-hearted heroism is completely convincing. Like Frodo, Sam, Merry and Pippin from the previous films, Bilbo is hopelessly out of place in a band of experienced warriors on a trek to save the day, but we as an audience are with him all the way. A key question in Tolkien’s original book is why Bilbo decides to join Gandalf and the dwarves on their dauntless expedition. His reason is the same as ours: for the adventure.
Endnote: I saw “The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey” in 3-D and in 48 frames per second. The 3-D is immersive and not a distraction. The same cannot be said for 48 fps: while it undeniably gives the image a crisp, crystal clarity, it also makes the film look like a televised (dare I say cheap) BBC production, while the often unnaturally speedy movements of the characters and the camera give the impression that the film is stuck on fast-forward (think Benny Hill being chased by nurses). My advice: see it in the standard 24 fps first time round to bask in the story and characters undisturbed and, if curious about the higher frame-rate, see it in 48 fps the second time round.
7/10
Good information you have listed here.
ReplyDeleteThanks a lot for giving everyone such a special opportunity to read from this web site. It is usually very awesome and as well
ReplyDelete