Returning to Middle Earth felt a bit like a school reunion. I was pleased to be back, but slightly embarrassed and curiously unconcerned about former acquaintances. Two screenings caused me to wish they had left Tolkien's book well alone.
Peter Jackson can't be blamed. Or maybe he can be. He adapts the book so faithfully (or at least the first 50 pages I've read) that you wonder why he bothered.
The truth is The Hobbit is an inferior story to the Lord of the Rings. It's that simple. Compared with the grave prospect of the race of Men's extinction in Rings, this is kids' stuff – as Gandalf says, 'an adventure'. I could not watch it as a separate, distinct film. I saw it, and I'm sure others did too, as a direct prequel to Rings.
Why didn't Jackson make The Hobbit first? That he didn't, I think, is significant. Perhaps 15 years ago he didn't feel it was worth putting on the screen. Perhaps he didn't then feel the story was epic enough. Perhaps three billion reasons forced him to reconsider.
Whilst my second viewing (from a better vantage point) impressed me slightly more, nothing is new or improved. That's the paradox. How many sequels and prequels do we rue because of their deviance from the original? My complaint isn't that Jackson doesn't give us what we want; it's that he gives us what HE wants. Is this a director at the height of his creative ability producing something just because he can? The 1:3 book-to-film ratio would indeed suggest so.
Yes, the Orcs are scarier; yes, some of the fighting is bloodier; and yes, the Pale Orc Azog is truly menacing, especially with his improvised left arm, but compare these things to what's not so good. All 13 dwarfs are bereft of any character. At least Gimley was funny. The film felt desperately dragged out, despite some stunning sequences, including an exhilarating fight with goblins and a stunning bout between rocky mountains! The often dubious CGI cannot, however, be excused.
I am not optimistic about the next two films. Sure, I'll see them. I don't mind being proved wrong. But if this is to happen, some serious tweaking needs to be done before December. At the very least they ought to make Smaug look like he isn't from Mike the Knight.
Peter Jackson can't be blamed. Or maybe he can be. He adapts the book so faithfully (or at least the first 50 pages I've read) that you wonder why he bothered.
The truth is The Hobbit is an inferior story to the Lord of the Rings. It's that simple. Compared with the grave prospect of the race of Men's extinction in Rings, this is kids' stuff – as Gandalf says, 'an adventure'. I could not watch it as a separate, distinct film. I saw it, and I'm sure others did too, as a direct prequel to Rings.
Why didn't Jackson make The Hobbit first? That he didn't, I think, is significant. Perhaps 15 years ago he didn't feel it was worth putting on the screen. Perhaps he didn't then feel the story was epic enough. Perhaps three billion reasons forced him to reconsider.
Whilst my second viewing (from a better vantage point) impressed me slightly more, nothing is new or improved. That's the paradox. How many sequels and prequels do we rue because of their deviance from the original? My complaint isn't that Jackson doesn't give us what we want; it's that he gives us what HE wants. Is this a director at the height of his creative ability producing something just because he can? The 1:3 book-to-film ratio would indeed suggest so.
Yes, the Orcs are scarier; yes, some of the fighting is bloodier; and yes, the Pale Orc Azog is truly menacing, especially with his improvised left arm, but compare these things to what's not so good. All 13 dwarfs are bereft of any character. At least Gimley was funny. The film felt desperately dragged out, despite some stunning sequences, including an exhilarating fight with goblins and a stunning bout between rocky mountains! The often dubious CGI cannot, however, be excused.
I am not optimistic about the next two films. Sure, I'll see them. I don't mind being proved wrong. But if this is to happen, some serious tweaking needs to be done before December. At the very least they ought to make Smaug look like he isn't from Mike the Knight.