the delphic expanse

***POST CONTAINS SPOILERS***

I've already seen "The Hobbit" twice (and I'll probably go see it a third time before they take it off the cinema's schedule indefinitely) and I liked it better the second time. I'm generally happy with the movie and I think it's especially generous to fans of the previous films. Even though the Shire introduction was a little long, I can't say I didn't enjoy every second of it. I know some people are unhappy with the fact that the soundtrack recycles the hobbit theme from LoTR - I like that, too, because I'm a fan and it filled me with sweet nostalgia to hear that theme and see the Shire again. It was like returning to a place I love, and that's nice.

What I didn't like was the unnecessary (IMO) cheap Hollywood bits - the Thunder battle, especially. I didn't quite see the point of that scene. Also, I hate the way Azog looks. He looks like something out of a video game. Oh, and the Radagast scene was again too long and most of it seemed pointless.

I loved seeing Gandalf, Elrond and Galadriel again. Rivendell looked more beautiful than ever. Gollum was fantastic. But, for me, the highlight of the movie, acting and character-wise, was Martin Freeman as Bilbo. I hadn't seen him in anything before "The Hobbit", and he was such a wonderful surprise. Definitely my favorite performance in the movie. He's very adept at expressing what his character feels without uttering a single word, and the Shire introduction where he has to deal with his unexpected guests was brilliant. I really liked the fact that he started out strong. From the first few minutes of his performance I could tell this was a skillful actor and the character would be a joy to watch. He continued to be brilliant throughout the film, of course. I loved how he played Bilbo's journey towards his own courage. Even though Bilbo does not consider himself a hero, he is not exactly timid either. When the situation calls for an act of courage, Bilbo can be counted on. And apparently so can Martin Freeman for giving us a beautifully nuanced and rich character. His Bilbo is easily one of the best-played characters in the Peter Jackson movies. I liked Sir Ian Holm, but Freeman will always be Bilbo to me.

The dwarves were adorable. I really loved James Nesbitt's Bofur. The part where he kept describing Smaug to Bilbo was hilarious. I liked Balin as well and I couldn't help thinking of his unfortunate fate in Moria. Poor guy!

And, well, I liked Thorin quite a bit, too. And not just because he's smoking hot. I thought the actor did a great job at portraying Thorin's noble character as well as his heroic quality (although movie Thorin is a little different from book Thorin, I'm currently refreshing my memory with a re-read). His battle scenes were very effective, and I completely agreed with Balin when he said that he could really call Thorin a king. I also liked the fact that, in the end, he acknowledged Bilbo's guts and welcomed him fully into his company. It also takes courage to admit you're wrong about someone. What I also appreciate about Thorin is the way he is set apart from the other dwarfs by a certain seriousness. The others are more light-hearted characters, they joke around and sing, some of them even seemed to have a certain air of caricature - Bombur especially, he looked a bit like Obelix. But Thorin has stuff on his mind, and it shows, and that's good.

Oh, and I thought Thorin looked a bit like a Klingon. In fact, a fellow Trekkie sent me a picture of Thorin as a Klingon. Check it out, it's AWESOME!

Who else has seen the movie and what did you think of it?

Another quick drive-by - I'll be back - yeah, I've seen it.

Kili. *swoon*

Argh. With everything that's been going on in RL for me I haven't gotten out there to see this one yet. And this week isn't looking good either...

I hope it's still in the theaters by Sunday.

Oh - I hope you can see it in the theater.

Bofur - I liked him, too. He kinda reminded me, visually, of Elliott Gould in M*A*S*H.
Bofur -


Gould (on the left) -


The first time Trapper John is seen in M*A*S*H, he's wearing an enormous snorkle jacket but I couldn't find a large, clear image of that.

Anyway - one major, massive defect in the film is Tolkein's own fault, which is that there are too many damned dwarves. It is extremely difficult to get a handle on many of them. Thorin, Bofur, Kili and Balin all have personalities, and those show. But others are caricatures, if that (e. g. Bombur is really only memorable as the fat guy. Someone else is just the skinny kid with the slingshot, etc.). Tolkein never really gave them personalities and so the lower level supporting cast is tough to distinguish, but that was true of the book.

Another flaw is the lack of women - Galadriel's role is beefed up, big time, as only she and one other woman (who I think plays the flute? She's an elf at Rivendell) are it. Otherwise, it's a testosterone fest. This is, again, a Tolkein flaw, as he had written The Hobbit to be a rip-roaring adventure for boys. It's a no-girls-allowed clubhouse, and Peter Jackson, et al had to really struggle to get some women onto the screen, not only here but in the LOTR films as well.

And I agree that the thunder/lightning fight scene was, well, it looked more like "hey, let's show everyone what we can do with CGI!" than "let's advance the plot". I felt that the scene with the trolls was a bit overlong as well (I'm not a fan of slapstick).

All of that being said, I loved it, and so did Mr. j. One thing we noticed was the set design elements which carried over from the LOTR films. The stairway in the dwarf castle (?) was a gussied-up, newer version of the crumbling stair in Moria in LOTR:FOTR and that makes stylistic sense. It ties the films together but also ties the species together, e. g. dwarves build this way, so it's unmistakable that this area is dwarf-ish. I see the same thing with the music. Carrying over the hobbit musical theme from LOTR makes sense as that's kind of how movie music is done (listen to the soundtrack to The Sound of Music if you'd like to test this theory out. As they're escaping from the Nazis, the soundtrack is playing an altered, more staccato version of So Long, Farewell).

The CGI is great and Gollum looks better than ever. Martin Freeman was a real joy - I just loved every scene he was in. And his scene with Gollum was very good. Not just the riddles and all, but it's also how he looks at Gollum, and how he cannot bring himself to bring down judgment upon someone as messed up and impoverished as Sméagol. Bilbo feels real pity, but also I think he realized that he'd really be crossing a Rubicon if he slew Gollum, and I feel that Bilbo didn't want to become a killer. He may have also have seen the fundamental unfairness in striking at Gollum while invisible, as if he were flattening an ant.

EntAllat wrote:Argh. With everything that's been going on in RL for me I haven't gotten out there to see this one yet. And this week isn't looking good either...

I hope it's still in the theaters by Sunday.

I hear you, EntAllat. I should have gone the day it opened. A theater in one of the towns on my train line to the city started showing it at midnight. I should have gotten off on my way home from the opera. As it is, if I want to see it, I have to go Thursday. It won't be there anymore on Saturday, and I doubt that the theater in the village will be showing it. For one thing, they don't have the equipment for the 3-D. I do so want to see Martin Freeman!

Archerite, if YOU need a Martin Freeman fix, then try to get the DVDs for Sherlock. Mr. Freeman is the BEST Dr. Watson.

By the way, those of you who have seen it, what version did you see? Regular, 3-D or IMAX. If it is still available at another theater in the area, then I might be able to see it in IMAX. Ummm, a larger-than-life Martin Freeman?

We saw it in regular (I'm not a fan of 3D or of its cost).

jespah wrote:We saw it in regular (I'm not a fan of 3D or of its cost).

When I looked into it, I found that IMAX was 3-D, too, and $15 a ticket. With my vision issues, 3-D does not work for me so definitely not worth it. Not to mention that Thursday must be change movies day at that theater because they don't list what is showing then.

On the other hand, I found that they show broadcasts from the Metropolitan Opera. Something for me to keep in mind for the next 5 years or so as I'm paying off my hospital bill. I don't see the Lyric, even the second balcony 6 floors up, in my future for vacation days anymore.

Egad, $15 a ticket. We paid $13.50 for the 2 of us (Sunday matinee, and we're not seniors).

So I hear ya on the $$.

Martin Freeman was absolutely fantastic as Bilbo. I knew he would be after I saw him in Sherlock. Evidently he was the unanimous choice to play Bilbo and Peter Jackson changed the shooting schedule to accommodate Freeman's own schedule. Smart move!

I also really enjoyed Richard Armitage's Thorin. Thorin is kind of a jackass in the book, and while he still is a bit in the movie, they did a much better job of explaining his attitude and giving more depth to him. The evolution of his relationship with Bilbo was well-handled, and I can't wait to see how it develops over the next two movies.

Ian McKellen was also excellent as Gandalf the Grey. I remember reading that he actually enjoyed playing that iteration of the character more than he enjoyed Gandalf the White, and it shows. The rest of the dwarves were pretty good for the most part. I enjoyed James Nesbitt's Bofur. I'm really glad Jackson took care to really give each of the dwarves a distinct look and attitude. That was one of my biggest worries going into the movie. My biggest nitpick is that Kili didn't look dwarven at all. Take away the height and he would have been more at home as a Ranger of the North.

Some people have complained about the pacing of the movie, and while I do think it was a little longer than it really needed to be, I was never bored. Still, I would have trimmed the Shire intro a bit (mostly the needless Frodo cameo), the stone giants, and the scene where Radagast distracted the orcs so the dwarves could escape (which was the one scene that I felt went on way too long). The climactic fight scene in Goblin-Town probably could have been trimmed down a bit, too, and it got a little too slapstick here and there. But The Hobbit is a lighter tale than The Lord of the Rings, so I wasn't surprised to see that.

When I first heard about the duology being split into a trilogy, I was kind of annoyed and figured it was just a shameless cash grab. While that still might be true, after seeing the first movie I can very easily see why they decided to make the split. If they'd kept it to just two films, the first one would have taken the group into Mirkwood and have them meet the elves, then continue on their way to the Lonely Mountain. All of that, plus meeting Beorn (which happens just before entering Mirkwood) would probably have added a good hour, hour and a half to the runtime. Now Jackson will be able to include all of that, as well as the additions he's woven in from Tolkien's Appendices in LOTR, without compromising anything else and having to rush the story.

I'm very glad I've started this thread! Thanks for replying, everyone!

$15 a ticket, huh? I also saw it in 3D (not IMAX ) and I paid the equivalent of like $7. I wasn't particularly bothered by the 3D, but I'm not sure it added much to the experience. I also don't know if it was 24 or 48 fps.

jespah, yes, Kili is a total cutie! I agree with Skywalker that he didn't look dwarven, but I'm a fangirl, I can't really complain and be honest about it. Nothing wrong with a gorgeous dwarf in my book. Thorin remains my favorite, though. I think his back story was very well-done and served making his attitude towards Bilbo understandable. OK, he was a little hard on him and not completely justifiably so since Bilbo himself had not asked to be part of the adventure. But we understand where he's coming from. We understand that he's had a rough past and that he carries a great responsibility to his people. He needs this mission to succeed and he's a little grumpy about it. I'm inclined to give him a break. A lot of the praise for this should go to Armitage's portrayal of the character - he managed to infuse Thorin more with nobility and integrity than with ill temper. I LOVED his dark, brooding stares, the intensity with which he threw himself at enemies in the battle scenes. I also loved that, behind the darkness and the intensity, you can also see a certain kindness. He really cares about his people, and it shows. Also, I think his movie poster is particularly dreamy:


Definitely not the face of a jackass.

I had not considered the lack of female characters, but you're right. There aren't many significant females in Tolkien's books. Strangely enough, as a female reader, I have never felt unwelcome in his world.

Also, jespah, thanks for mentioning the reusing of the Moria set from FoTR. I had not noticed that.

Glory, I will watch Sherlock as soon as I can. I am watching Game of Thrones currently, but after that, I will dig in. I can't wait to see both Martin Freeman and Benedict Cumberbatch. By the way, I find it so totally awesome that Cumberbatch will be voicing Smaug! My two favorite franchises - LoTR and Trek - linked in this most surprising way. Yay! Suppose they could have found a role for Freeman in Trek as well?

Skywalker, I also agree with you on the pacing matter. Although, the Radagast part that I would leave out is him reviving that hedgehog.