Comments for sursumcorda.salemsattic.com/post/the-hobbit-an-unexpected-journey-the-movie

Comment #3700

2019-05-06T03:27:15Z

I'm with you on Dawn Treader. As I began my review of the movie, "How can you take a book without one single battle scene and turn it into an action movie?" Not to mention turning a book so full of light into something so dark and creepy!

But I fear I'm becoming a Grumpy Old Lady. Being counter-cultural is cool when you are young, but negative and reactionary just a few decades later....

Comment #3699

2013-01-28T20:51:18Z

I thought PJ had excellent casting in LOTR, for one. Although he took a lot of liberties with the plot, he remained relatively true to the spirit of the story, IMO. Although he butchered Faramir (and I disagreed with his reasoning for modifying the character, which he gives in the special features), I thought he did great with Boromir, who has always been a personal favorite.

What I liked best about LOTR was that there was a *feeling* to them that was one of a great epic tale, similar to the books. Any book adapted to movie form is bound to lose something, but I felt PJ was able to hold onto the feeling of retelling a great myth, which is what Tolkein wanted LOTR to be. And PJ took incredible pains with attention to detail, and I felt used his special effects sparingly and well.

I have my complaints about LOTR, but they are mostly details relating to how the books were adapted, rather than an overall criticism. Watching the special features really did go a long way to helping me appreciate PJ's genius, even if I disagree with this or that modification.

The Hobbit, on the other hand... felt like a whole lot of filler for not much of the Hobbit. Like you, I found Bilbo to be very well-done, and the young dwarfs- Killi and Filli, if I recall correctly, were quite playful. But the overdose of "comic relief" was annoying, the deviations from the book were huge and bad, and the overuse of special effects that added nothing to the plot were distracting. I did not watch the 3-D version, and there were several scenes in the 2-D movie where I felt- aha- they filmed this just to show off their new 3-D cameras that they created for this film. The scenes did not advance the plot, and seemed to make no sense in the 2-D film.

As you mentioned, the game of riddles was well-done, and as I said, the dwarf's song at the beginning was in the spirit of the books. The rest just felt like filler in order to stretch a relatively short book into 3 movies.

It is on my list to re-read LOTR this year. It has been a number of years since I read them. I'm pretty strongly opposed to letting my kids watch any movie based on a much better book, so it will be years before they watch any of the LOTR movies...

And while we're not on the subject- how horrible was the butchering of Voyage of the Dawn Treader? Ugh. C.S. Lewis probably turned in his grave when they released that film!

Comment #3698

2013-01-28T14:54:26Z

Very interesting, Monica. Since I found this movie very similar to LOTR, I'd love to know what you see the the latter that makes it so much better than The Hobbit.

Comment #3697

2013-01-28T14:36:54Z

I loved the books, and I'm one of those sat-through-20+-hours-of-special-features extended edition LOTR movie lovers. And I hated The Hobbit. With the exception of the dwarfs singing at Bilbo's house, which really had a lot of the book feel to it... the whole movie was terrible.

Comment #3696

2013-01-28T12:13:41Z

No, haven't seen it. Nor heard of it, actually.

Comment #3695

2013-01-28T12:03:04Z

Just curious if you had ever seen the animated version of The Hobbit? It obviously wouldn't have all the special effects, but I was wondering if it was truer to the story.

Sarah