The LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy was the great cinematographic experience of my generation. I'm the last guy to care about wizards, capes and dragons, but I've seen the movies in theater, own DVD copies and watched the entire thing one sitting on at least three different occasions In many ways, it's an experience that goes beyond cinema. Peter Jackson's immortal trilogy is aging like fine wine, so that begs the question: what was the point of slapping a freakin' Hobbit TRILOGY on top of it? Money, obviously. But after successfully turning three thick novels into three great movies, isn't it a stretch to turn one novel into three movies? Since I don't take too kindly to people deliberately trying to cash in on my memories, I sat down with the Hobbit and had a little man-to-man talk.
If you're not familiar with J.R.R Tolkien, you have to know that his Middle Earth stories are all loosely inter-related. They are a mythology, something half-way between the Bible and a really kick-ass history book, that recalls the important moments of this fantasy universe. THE HOBBIT was published about seventeen years before the first volume of THE LORD OF THE RINGS, it was intended to be children literature, but it turned out to be something of a prologue to the greatest fantasy novels ever written. THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY is about Bilbo (Martin Freeman), a conflicted hobbit that destiny and a swanky wizard named Mithrandir (Ian McKellen) force into an unexpected quest: reclaim the mountain home and the gold treasure of the dwarves from a dragon named Smaug. Nobody understand what the fucking point of Bilbo being there is, but sometimes things just write themselves as you go along.
Thomas Wolfe wrote a novel titled YOU CAN'T GO HOME AGAIN, in 1940. I've never read it, but I like to use the title as a piece of wisdom, when a novel/movie/art project is trying to milk an idea too hard. THE LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy felt special, but it was the great climax, the final battle of Middle Earth *. Prequels are a pretty fashion-y idea in the landscape of Hollywood's creative bankruptcy, but you can't exactly call THE HOBBIT a prequel, because it's not. It's a different novel, written about two decades apart, and it is both a good and a bad thing, in perspective of a movie adaptation. THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY doesn't piggyback the characters from THE LORD OF THE RING to borrow some credibility (it would be the other way around if the penultimate trilogy sucked), but it is merely a training swing for what would become of the Middle Earth saga.
Here is the thing about THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY. Yeah, it rings a little hollow compared to its on-screen predecessor, but it's kind of fun anyway. Typically, I'm not the one to enjoy stuffing myself with empty calories, but I ate a plateful of Hobbit adventures and didn't mind it so much. See, Peter Jackson's a pretty smart guy. He was aware he would run low on content over three movies and singled out the one great variable that would make his new trilogy stand out: long, bloated, absolutely bonkers action scenes. Whatever action scenes there were in the novel are ridiculously blown out of proportion on screen and made larger than life. THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY was made for 3D technology and it shows, yet it is mercifully easy on the hollow, slow motion scenes that are supposed to let you enjoy the things popping in your face. It's one of the first movies I'd be glad to see in 3D.
Tolkien is also fun for the universal appeal of his stories. There's a lot going on beyond the wizards, dragons and paladins. His fiction has always been about developing one's potential and becoming the best person you can be. THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY is about the courage one needs to step outside his comfort zone and confront his weaknesses. It's a little indulgent and Oprah-ish, but I don't mind it in allegory. THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY (and the works of J.R.R Tolkien in general) aren't trying to make you feel dumb for not ''getting the life lesson". There are no life lessons to it. Just beings who are challenged by life and the freedom to form your own opinion about it. So I can take some Hobbit Hallmark wisdom, because it's not shoving itself down my throat.
So, there is a point to making a trilogy about The Hobbit. If you'll allow me a video game parallel, it's like finishing a sandbox game and just letting loose and wreaking pointless havoc in its universe afterward. You're done with the emotional experience, but you're not ready to leave, yet. Of course, if you have a child born after 2005 or if you've been living in a nuclear shelter for the last decade, watching The Hobbit trilogy before watching Lord of the Rings actually makes sense. Otherwise, THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY (along with its subsequent and projected movies) is a good time without being meaningless. Overall, it fails to recapture the magic of THE LORD OF THE RINGS, but not entirely. There is still a shitload of things to see and experience in Tolkien's world.
* Tolkien nerds, please don't eviscerate me in the comment section if he wrote something that situates itself afterward in the mythology. Have a little perspective and get the point, please.
Tolkien is also fun for the universal appeal of his stories. There's a lot going on beyond the wizards, dragons and paladins. His fiction has always been about developing one's potential and becoming the best person you can be. THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY is about the courage one needs to step outside his comfort zone and confront his weaknesses. It's a little indulgent and Oprah-ish, but I don't mind it in allegory. THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY (and the works of J.R.R Tolkien in general) aren't trying to make you feel dumb for not ''getting the life lesson". There are no life lessons to it. Just beings who are challenged by life and the freedom to form your own opinion about it. So I can take some Hobbit Hallmark wisdom, because it's not shoving itself down my throat.
So, there is a point to making a trilogy about The Hobbit. If you'll allow me a video game parallel, it's like finishing a sandbox game and just letting loose and wreaking pointless havoc in its universe afterward. You're done with the emotional experience, but you're not ready to leave, yet. Of course, if you have a child born after 2005 or if you've been living in a nuclear shelter for the last decade, watching The Hobbit trilogy before watching Lord of the Rings actually makes sense. Otherwise, THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY (along with its subsequent and projected movies) is a good time without being meaningless. Overall, it fails to recapture the magic of THE LORD OF THE RINGS, but not entirely. There is still a shitload of things to see and experience in Tolkien's world.
* Tolkien nerds, please don't eviscerate me in the comment section if he wrote something that situates itself afterward in the mythology. Have a little perspective and get the point, please.