Friday, December 14, 2012

The Hobbit: HOORAY!

This shot looks terrible, but it's not at all what it looks like in the film! While Jackson shot it at 48fps, most audiences will see it in 24fps (which is how I saw it) because only a handful of theaters have the equipment to play the new 45fps. There were only a couple of scenes where I thought the image wasn't quite right, but my immediate thought was, "I wish I was seeing this in 3D (I had to see it in 2D)," not that something didn't look right or looked bad; so why are critics complaining? Take a guess why the liberal media is complaining, just take a guess,...
Not only will I GLADLY eat every awful word I said of Peter Jackson doing The Hobbit, I will even roll it around in wet dirt and then eat it! First, I was bitter that Jackson was doing it (I hated his adaptation of  The Lord Of the Rings) then I was biter he split The Hobbit into three books, then I was bitter about him filming it in 48fps, then I was bitter it was going to be 3 hours long!
I take it all back,...
This was so enjoyable! The still shots--like the one above--look bad, but that's not how the film looks. I thought the pacing was actually done well (because fans of The Hobbit hand to realize it is being made with the idea in mind that the audience member has not read the book and Jackson was sensitive to that). The characters have great dynamics with lots of artful tension and good investment has been made in them to carry our interest through to the end AND see why that which happens to them happens.
See how blurry this looks? I didn't see any of that in the film.
There is a difference between deviating from the book and being consistent with what Tolkien wrote. I thought Jackson would deviate from Tolkien and turn this into a pro-socialist agenda, which would have been very easy to do; that's clearly not what happens, and the liberal media dishing on this (I think) is due to some added scenes to make it even more of an anti-socialist film intentionally (again, Jackson might be a liberal, but the film isn't); you know me, I would tell you so.
Even a scene like this, which is different than how Tolkien wrote it, is still consistent with what Tolkien wanted to communicate and the characters. IF I were going to complain about something--and I don't really feel like it because I am so grateful the film is so good!--it would be that, visually, the goblins aren't more differentiated from the orcs and when Gollum and Bilbo play the riddle game, it's hard to understand what Gollum says but those are my only strained complaints about a film I was ready to bury!
So at what point does the film cut off to pick up at the second installment?
After the eagles have rescued the lot and taken them to the Eagles' nest, Carrock, they see the far off silhouette of The Lonely Mountain and Bilbo thinks, the worse is definitely behind us now. I am getting the review of Tolkien's book up, then I will review the film.
DO see it!