"The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey"

Oh it felt great to be back in Middle-earth! To me, this was a bitter-sweet reunion with this fantasy world, but one that was definitely more sweet than bitter. In fact, from seeing trailers, reading articles, and building my expectations in anticipation for this movie, I can honestly say that all my expectations were met, both the good and the bad. My single greatest expectation was that of returning to Middle-earth. That definitely happened. My single greatest fear was that of an over-sized budget. That also happened. My biggest complaint is ultimately symbolized by the Pale Orc, Azog the Defiler. This is not to say that I didn't like him. In fact I did. What it is saying is that in "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy, a character of this importance would not have been a completely computer generated character, but rather an actor in prosthetics, costume, and props. What made "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy so amazing was it's use of practical effects, costumes, sets, and what the film-makers would refer to as "bigatures" in creating Middle-earth. What disappointed me about "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey" was the replacement of these things with computer generated effects and green-screen. This is something you see increasingly in movies these days with bloated budgets, pouring increasing amounts of money into these computer effects. Yes, I understand these things are necessary (take Gollum for example, who looked better than ever in this movie!), especially when making an epic fantasy film. And yes, we don't have a "George Lucas" thing going here where the entire movie is filmed on a green-screen with minimal actors (though at times it sure seemed like that). This may be a poor way to critique any film, but one of the things that made "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy so great was how great it looked. When that good practical look is replaced with the not-nearly-as-good-looking computer generated look, it takes quite a bit away for me; it takes me out of the "believable" illusion, the suspended reality you need when watching movies of this genre. Now, one may think I'm unfair in comparing "The Hobbit" to "The Lord of the Rings," but since they found it a necessity to join the two so closely, I feel justified in comparing the two. Despite these being two separate stories that have over-lapping characters and elements, Peter Jackson decided to remind us, and remind us often, that these films will be a prequel to his previous films. Is that necessary? Is it warranted? Is it some sort of marketing scheme because we're all somehow going to forget that these films are related to "The Lord of the Rings" and we need to be reminded so that we remember how much we loved the previous films and want to see these ones? I'm fine with them being connected. The fact is, they are connected in certain ways. But do we need a little shout-out, turn and wink at the audience moment in every other scene reminding us of the previous films? I don't, and I would think others don't either. My other substantial complaint was the prologue. I understand you're trying to replicate "The Fellowship of the Ring" and give us the back story in your opening prologue setting up your trilogy. I understand how effective it was in "The Fellowship of the Ring." Unfortunately, it fell pretty flat in "An Unexpected Journey" and felt extremely contrived. Other minor concerns (the difference of actors/characters in this film from their performances in "The Lord of the Rings," the sometimes slow-moving, one might even say stagnant, story) I'm willing to hold judgement on for the sake of how they fit into context of the trilogy as a whole. I understand that seems like a lot to not like about a movie, so I should reiterate, I loved being back in Middle-earth! And there was a lot to love about this movie. The shining characteristic of this movie is Martin Freeman as Bilbo Baggins. He was great! He played the reluctant adventurer well who is awed by this new world he is discovering and slowly finding his courage and yearning for adventure. The single greatest segment for me was Bilbo and his confrontation with Gollum. Despite his finding the One Ring being completely different in this film than was portrayed in "The Fellowship of the Ring" prologue (one could argue that that is taken care of by the opening prologue in this film telling us how this is the "true" story that no one knows), the scenes of him in the caves, his finding the Ring, his game of riddles with Gollum, his sparing of Gollum's life, and subsequent escape was amazing. Never more did I feel like I was back in Middle-earth, Gollum and a small hobbit together again, joined by circumstance involving the One Ring. Despite Ian Mckellen's Gandalf in "The Hobbit" not quite being as consistent with his portrayal of Gandalf in "The Lord of the Rings," it was still Gandalf, and there were more times than not that made smile seeing him on the big screen again. I loved the dynamic between the dwarves, though I wish we could have seen more of all thirteen of them. I loved the difference between the dwarves, I'm glad they don't all look like Gimli. I really liked Richard Armitage as Thorin. It was great how he was trusting and almost affectionate toward his dwarf comrades and untrusting and almost vile toward everyone else. The music was good, I can't quite say that it was great like it was in "The Lord of the Rings." It was good to hear a lot of the old themes from "The Lord of the Rings." It was good to hear new themes ("Song of the Lonely Mountain" anyone?). Unfortunately where "The Lord of the Rings" had diversity in it's themes that we heard throughout, the music in this was often repetitious. As cool as it was to hear the dwarves sing around Bilbo's hearth, to hear the tune throughout the movie constantly was a bit distracting. I realize one could make the same argument for the same song playing for the 3 and a half hours we watch Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli pursue.....well, anyone or anything. That is why I am more in favor of the music than I am against it. This was the theme of the dwarves and we follow the dwarves the entire movie. It's not hard to understand why we're hearing their theme constantly. Besides, it is a really good theme. The Pale Orc (despite my previous critique) was a great villain for the heroic Thorin. Radagast the Brown (despite his no doubt meant to appeal to younger audiences rabbit-drawn forest sleigh) was a fun character and effective device in introducing us to the Necromancer and his connection to future events. The scenery (despite their too often green-screen nature) was still beautiful to look at. The fact is, I was anxious to get back to Middle-earth and "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey" took me there. As much as I was bothered by certain things, they are drowned out by what I loved about the movie and the fact that it was great to be back. I anxiously look forward to the future installments.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0903624/