Nearly a decade after The Lord of the Rings movies, Peter Jackson returns to Middle Earth and tries to emulate the same success with The Hobbit movies, based on the story that happened years before Frodo and the gang went on their quest.
The first Hobbit movie divided both fans and critics, with many people criticizing the pacing and some mediocre special effects. Some think that the odd pacing was due to the controversial decision to divide the book into three movies, resulting in the writers having to drag scenes out and add new sub plots. Is there gold to be found in this sequel, or did the writers desolate one of J.R.R. Tolkien’s most memorable stories?
After escaping the Goblins in the first film, Bilbo and the dwarves head into the forest and continue their quest to regain the dwarves’ homeland. Gandalf parts with the team to deal with his own business regarding the coming of Sauron. Along the way, the dwarves come across spiders, shape shifting giants, and even elves (along with a returning Legolas), standing in their way of the Lonely Mountain. Eventually they make it, but are faced with a dragon-sized problem.
As expected, in order to make the movie longer, various sub plots were added into the mix. Gandalf’s side quest, which was originally not in the book, was explored, the character of Bard was expanded, and a new elf chatacter was created for the formation of a love triangle between Legolas (who was also not in the original book) and one of the dwarves.
The closer look at Gandalf’s activities was a clever touch, as they did not focus on his issue in the book too much and adds some clarity to why it was so important for him to part.
Bard’s character extension is also a nice addition. Not to spoil what his role will be in the final movie, but I think his relationship to the town and its politics will add good substance to this trilogy’s climax. There was not enough to convince me of the romance between two of the characters, and Legolas just feels like he’s there for cool action scenes and nostalgia for the previous trilogy. I did not care for the love triangle. There was a good chunk of people who liked the romance, but I was not one of them.
The pacing in the movie is much better than it was in An Unexpected Journey. It flows nicely, the scenes do not feel too long (aside from maybe the last few). There’s a good balance of action and character exploration. Other than Legolas and some references to Sauron, the movie does not try to use nostalgia to win over the audience like the first entry did. As I mentioned before, some of the subplots are better than others, but, for the most part, they are a welcome addition.
One criticism I do have is that despite these movies being named The Hobbit, it doesn’t feel like Bilbo is the main character. He does have his times to shine in this installment, such as the scene with the elf hideout and the one with the confrontation with Smaug. The way it is balanced makes it feel like Bilbo gets the same amount of screen time and development as most of the other characters in the movie.
The acting is what you would expect it to be in a Lord of the Rings movie, great as usual. Martin Freeman does a good job playing the nervous and outspoken hero in television and films, and Bilbo is no exception. The characters in the previous film, like Gandalf and Thorin, have actors that take their roles seriously in the emotions of their characters. As for the newer additions, Bard’s actor does a great job dealing with the many struggles of the character, while the new elf, Tauriel, is pretty likable and fun to watch. The best new star of the movie is Benedict Cumberbatch as the voice of Smaug the dragon. Smaug is the reason the dwarves have not reclaimed their home for decades, so the dragon would have to sound as intimidating as he looks, and Cumberbatch fits that role perfectly.
Speaking of Smaug, the special effects in this movie are revolutionary, especially for him. While there are entertaining action scenes, like the memorable barrel escape, Smaug is the biggest highlight of the movie. Similar to how Gollum was groundbreaking in The Two Towers, Smaug is the next step in evolution for giant movie monsters. The textures and movements on this creation feel so real, that it felt like Warner Bros knew how to train their dragon. Even if you are not a fan of J.R.R. Tolkien’s stories, I recommend seeing this movie for Smaug alone, he’s THAT good.
While many were on the fence in terms of the first movie, The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug feels like the true movie we were waiting for. Aside from some iffy sub plots and character balance, it feels well-paced, well directed, and are a welcome addition to these Middle-Earth stories. There is some entertaining popcorn action to be had as well as exploring some new characters, and Smaug was far from a letdown. So far, The Hobbit trilogy is not as up to par as The Lord of the Rings trilogy, but if Jackson makes the final installment as good or even better than this, then it could be close.
I agree with almost everything you say except the expansion of Bard’s role. I would have preferred to spend more time in Beorn’s house and Mirkwood, scenes that are in the book. However, as your title says, “DOS hits gold,” which was obviously Jackson’s goal.
As the song says, “money changes everything. He had a choice between art and money; unfortunately, he chose the latter and threw canon under the proverbial bus.
Though I am sure the review was written thoughtfully, I can’t say this article will encourage me to continue reading the Gustavian Weekly.
That the writer, i) enjoyed the way Gandalf’s ancillary story was developed is a bit off. It was just a video game style confrontation rather than (more faithfully) amassing the White Council to storm Dol Guldur in a rather pathetic imitation of his imprisonment in Orthanc in the previous trilogy. Very weak, and Gandalf looked quite foolish.
ii) Tauriel. If she were either a captain that actually upheld her vows and duties, or simply a favourite page of the king that was used to doing what she wanted, then she might have been at least a credible addition. As it is, she’s key to the weakest part of the film, and she feels politically correct.
iii) The town’s politics. When did Laketown become Dutch Dickensville? Those lines about illegal fish and democracy are going to have to eat themselves in the next film when Bard is made king. The problem with the settlement in the novel is that leadership was weaker, more confusing, and largely mercantile. And since when do advisers empty chamber pots for their masters? Again, very PC.
iv) Finally, one of the wonderful things about the first Hobbit (yes, I loved it) was the faithfulness to the book with the ancillary themes remaining humble. The opposite is the case with the second installment. I hope that when Peter Jackson is editing the third film, he won’t be using reviews such as these for reference.