The Hobbit
Dec. 26th, 2012 08:51 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
sootyowlOn the 23rd I went and saw The Hobbit in standard definition. It was good, not fantastic, but I enjoyed seeing familiar faces from LOTR, even if they felt a bit like special guest appearances on a TV program.
Which brings me to why The Hobbit was just good. The Hobbit itself is a rather slim novel and you can tell movie was really stretching it for all it was worth. Also the added bits taken from The Silmarillion and other Tolkien texts felt shoehorned in. Scene transitions in LOTR were smooth and felt like each scene meant something and brought a facet to the table. In The Hobbit, I felt like scenes could have been trimmed and that scene transitions were not smooth, but disjointed and smashed together to make the film longer.
My other problem is that while I do like Martin Freeman, he is not quintessentially Bilbo to me. Everyone in LOTR fits their roles like a glove, but Martin didn't bring any nuances to Bilbo. He was decent, but doesn't hold a candle to the version played by Ian Holm.
It was great to see Ian McKellen return as Gandalf though. He embodies Gandalf so well.
The actors for the dwarves were all well cast. Standouts to me were Richard Armitage as Thorin (but that might just be because I'm a tad in love with him), Ken Stott as Balin, and brothers Kili and Fili for being exceptionally adorable. But every dwarven actor deserves praise for their work.
While I will definitely watch The Hobbit again and buy the movie, I don't think the discs will get as worn out as my LOTR ones have. The Hobbit doesn't live up to the magic and brilliance of LOTR, but that's what happens when the goal is to makes as much money from a franchise as you can.
Which brings me to why The Hobbit was just good. The Hobbit itself is a rather slim novel and you can tell movie was really stretching it for all it was worth. Also the added bits taken from The Silmarillion and other Tolkien texts felt shoehorned in. Scene transitions in LOTR were smooth and felt like each scene meant something and brought a facet to the table. In The Hobbit, I felt like scenes could have been trimmed and that scene transitions were not smooth, but disjointed and smashed together to make the film longer.
My other problem is that while I do like Martin Freeman, he is not quintessentially Bilbo to me. Everyone in LOTR fits their roles like a glove, but Martin didn't bring any nuances to Bilbo. He was decent, but doesn't hold a candle to the version played by Ian Holm.
It was great to see Ian McKellen return as Gandalf though. He embodies Gandalf so well.
The actors for the dwarves were all well cast. Standouts to me were Richard Armitage as Thorin (but that might just be because I'm a tad in love with him), Ken Stott as Balin, and brothers Kili and Fili for being exceptionally adorable. But every dwarven actor deserves praise for their work.
While I will definitely watch The Hobbit again and buy the movie, I don't think the discs will get as worn out as my LOTR ones have. The Hobbit doesn't live up to the magic and brilliance of LOTR, but that's what happens when the goal is to makes as much money from a franchise as you can.