Tag Archives: The Lord of the Rings

The Hobbit: Episode I (**)

27 Dec

Peter Jackson and his WETA special effects company have kicked off the second act of their Tolkien adaptations with a film that is both triumphant and frustrating. This review refers to the 3D/48fps version of The Hobbit.

The triumph comes from the technical end. Watching this film at 48fps was disconcerting at first until the brain adjusts to the fine granularity of details that are made available at such a high frame rate. There are scenes where it is very distracting; but for the most part it enables WETA to do video compositing of real people with CGI so perfectly that the viewer is taken beyond the “uncanny valley” to a place where hundreds of goblins chasing a dozen dwarves is completely believable. The film should probably win a technical Oscar or two for this, and someone should devise a new one for the actors who have to perform against blue screens and react to something that they can only imagine.

The frustration comes from the script, and that can be laid at the feet of Jackson and the studio. One of the things I appreciated the most about Jackson’s adaptation of The Lord of the Rings is the fact that he cut and remixed elements of the books to make for a more exciting and engaging film. I am not a particular fan of The Lord of the Rings in book form. The Hobbit, on the other hand, has always struck me as a more compact, child-friendly distillation of what Tolkien had to say. I read it with my son, a chapter at a time, earlier this year. When it was announced that the film version would not be two instalments but rather three, my heart sank, because I knew that for the sake of making the studio some more money, Jackson would be doing the opposite operation with this book: expanding and inventing scenes to pad out the script.

And indeed, that is how the film feels: overstuffed and overlong, beginning with the completely unnecessary opening prologue through an unexpected meeting of the minds at Rivendell. Jackson inserts a couple of scenes with another wizard who has been tracking the Necromancer and then brings in Saruman to talk about it, clearly intending to create closer ties between this film and the others where none are needed. The excess is at its worst, unfortunately, in the many scenes where the dwarves are in peril, such as a battle between storm giants or being chased up a tree by wargs; the peril becomes so ridiculously overwrought that it seems impossible for any of them to survive, much less all of them. As a result, the well-choreographed action sequences of the LoTR films is replaced with awkward and frankly stupid set pieces that could have just as easily come from a Transformers film, or the last Indiana Jones picture. Even the Bilbo/Gollum riddling sequence felt long to me.

The cast is generally good, and they do what they can with the cards they have been dealt. Martin Freeman does well as Bilbo, Ian McKellen is his usual wry self as Gandalf. Standouts among the dwarves so far are Ken Stott as Balin, James Nesbitt as Bofur, and Richard Armitage as Thorin, who is clearly being groomed as the Aragorn of the piece.

Much like The Fellowship of the Ring, this first part of The Hobbit ends with the group embarking on the second stage of their journey. Unlike the other film, I am not very interested in following. As I joked with Nicole afterward, I feel like I have already seen the “Extended Edition” that should have come out afterward on DVD; if New Line really wants to boost home video sales, they should offer a Director’s Cut that contracts this thing by an hour.

The Hunger Games, Trilogies, and Diminishing Returns

15 Mar

Did I mention that I finished The Hunger Games trilogy recently? I finished The Hunger Games trilogy recently. And as you may infer from the title of this post, I did not enjoy the second and third installments, Catching Fire and Mockingjay, quite as much as I did the first. I might mention some plot details as I go on, so consider that a spoiler warning if you care about that kind of thing.

Generally, I did enjoy reading the series and it was always compelling enough for me to push through the bits that felt repetitive or less interesting. Suzanne Collins is very good at constructing a heartbreaking ethical situation and then setting things in motion while leaving room for surprises. After the tension of the first book, it was a bit of a bore to read about the “victory tour” in Catching Fire, but the concepts of the Quarter Quell and of putting two dozen survivors back into the games was brilliant. Collins found a way to structure her trilogy so that the plot is essentially repeated three times, with the stakes higher for each iteration; unfortunately, despite this, I felt that the tension generated in the execution was lower. Indeed, I don’t think it would work at all were it not for the magnetism of the narrator, Katniss, and the wise decision to limit Katniss’ awareness of what is happening outside of herself, forcing her to constantly turn her attention inward. Due to the trauma of the games, she becomes an increasingly unreliable and correspondingly fascinating narrator.

It is disappointing to me that ultimately The Hunger Games is another young adult fantasy story that could not be left alone with a single outstanding volume: the standard in fantasy writing for some time has been the trilogy, breaking up and awkwardly repeating the heroic journey structure for commercial reasons and in some kind of misguided tribute to Tolkien; ironic, given that The Lord of the Rings was originally split into three volumes due to postwar paper shortages. This combination of reader habit and editorial pressure often leads to lackluster outcomes, such as in Philip Pullman’s His Dark Materials or Kenneth Oppel’s Airborn. In the case of The Hunger Games, if it was indeed necessary to tell us about what happened to Katniss after the end of the first novel (and I am not convinced it was), I think the series would have been better served by combining the latter two books and cutting out the repetitive material, and especially cutting out or at least reducing the discussion of who Katniss should choose as a romantic partner. A better option might have been to have shorter one-off sequels set in the aftermath of the original story, as Pullman did with “Lyra’s Oxford.”

Attention has turned now to the films, of course, since the first (presumably of 3) comes out next week. Perhaps some of the concerns I have will be addressed in the screenplays, the way that they were with the Lord of the Rings films.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 554 other followers

%d bloggers like this: