Random Movie Review: The Hobbit: something about something something.


I found it rather disappointing. The same was true for the first installment, but that won’t stop me from watching the third as … yeah too much of a fan of the book and too much damn optimism. Still, fan and optimism aside, I can’t ignore the fact that the pacing in this movie was awful. People complained about the walking back in the pre-extended edition original Lord of the Rings: Fellowship blah blah blah. This feels worse. It feels worse because OMG THE BOOK IS SO FREAKING SHORT! WHY IS THIS TAKING SO DAMN LONG?!?!

The action (like in the barrel scene) was good. The barrel scene fight was superb ballet, really. Fabulously choreographed and executed. But, taken as a whole, it’s a very stop and go movie.

Actors and Acting:

Honestly, I don’t feel like going into this. Same damn people, every damn time. Here is a list of them. Legolas (Bloom) felt, understandably, older than his character in LotR, because HE is like ten years older. He had what felt like no chemistry with Tauriel (Evangeline Lilly), but then I guess that made the connection between Tauriel and Kili (Aiden Turner) actually believable and the only thing (besides OMG YAY A DRAGON!) worth watching in the whole of the thing.

via http://lotrconfessions.tumblr.com/
via http://lotrconfessions.tumblr.com/

I don’t disagree with that statement as shown on LOTR Confessions, but the thing is, they ended up being the most genuine thing in the film. The dwarves uncover their homeland. And I felt nothing. It was the acting, it was the pacing, maybe the script writing, maybe the way it was filmed, probably a little bit of all of it. I don’t like how Tolkin’s stuff totally fails the Bechedel test with everything, but I still connected somewhat with the sort of pull they had to one another. It was campy as hell, but the fact was that “campy as hell” was the best I got out of the mess.

I can’t begin to say how much I adore Stephen Fry (huge QI fan!), who played the Master of Laketown, but bugh. I wasn’t impressed.

I say that, but Martin Freeman, our Bilbo, did a good job. His brown nosing with Smaug was fun and well acted.

Graphics and Visuals

The visual graphics we also pretty disappointing in all BUT the dragon, which was pleasant…

That detail!
That detail!
Like this lovely thing.
eye and nose
And this lovely thing too, which they screw up later.

…though you have the help of “obviously bullshit, so I’ll accept that it’s flawed” on your side when designing something like a giant CGI dragon, but it seems very obvious that all that money was spent on the dragon and not, say, the liquid gold which looks rather like a different color of the stuff used in The Matrix.


Or Terminator 2.

What did they do? Put silver paint on cake icing or something? Is that just a cake? Anyhow, paint it gold and that's what the molten gold looked like.
What did they do? Put silver paint on cake icing or something? Is that just a cake? Anyhow, paint it gold and that’s what the molten gold looked like.

Which are both darn old movies now. I realize liquid graphics aren’t the easiest, but that was shoddy.

I will give the tiny bit of credit to the landscape shots, as always, these are beautiful. But, really, I know NZ is beautiful by now. You’ve spent over a decade convincing me of this fact. Stop wasting time with it!

I mean, YES, the blue butterflies were VERY pretty, but did we really need to spend THAT long watching Bilbo giggle over them?
I mean, YES, the blue butterflies were VERY pretty, but did we really need to spend THAT long watching Bilbo giggle over them?

The LOTR Debate (aka rant)

I know it’s not a “prequel” (though in does make a beginning for the LOTR, no denying that, and it’s being pointed in that direction, regardless), and I know it’s not supposed to be a copy of LOTR (though some of the dialogue, tone, and camera work mimic it very closely). My problem lies in the stretching out of the story in what feels, to me, as a grab for money and little else. I don’t feel that the additions and stretching adds much to the film (see the pacing issue, a lot of it can be connected to this), and (again, I realize it’s NOT LOTR) with the LOTR movies, specifically looking at the original which had to sell the idea that an epic fantasy movie could be made to sell with the sort of pacing typical to big-budget films, there’s no reason for 3 movies out of this one, small book except grasping. It could reasonably been done in two, in my opinion.


By the time the credit screen rolls (which I was both wishing for and dreading when it did), I felt let down because I felt like it COULD have ended (as in taken the time to complete the whole story, wasn’t it SUPPOSED to be 2 movies at some point? Actually, wasn’t it supposed to be ONE?), and grateful because GAH those liquid effects were wearing me out.

Yet, I’m still going to keep watching it because:

Screw vampires, my teenage walls and shirts and bedspreads were dragons. All dragons. Desktop backgrounds, themes, cursors, all dragons. Bookmark list FULL of dragon websites (and anime, of course).

2 thoughts on “Random Movie Review: The Hobbit: something about something something.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s