The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum - View Single Post - An Unexpected Journey, or the morning after

Lalwendë · 12-14-2012, 12:15 PM

Spoilery - You have been warned.

Now I have seen it, I can look at stuff about it once more. Phew. I was expecting surprises, and there were a ton of 'em.

Let's get my gripe out of the way first. The one thing that I did not like and could not rationalise (there were other things I personally didn't like much but they were rational, coherent etc) was Azog's vendetta. I need to think about that bit some more. I did not like how Jackson chose to recycle motifs from LotR (e.g. the ring falling onto Bilbo's finger and Gandalf asking a moth to bring the eagles - there are a fair few more). But that's just personal. I feel it would have stood up well on its own merits without needing to be self-referential. However, plenty of other geeks lap up this kind of meta stuff so I know why it was there. Ho hum. Oh, and no Burrahobbit joke. Boo.

"It was too long!" cried critics. No. It wasn't too long at all. I felt like an hour had passed. "The material is too thin for a film this long!" also cried critics. Hmmm, The Hobbit is a children's book and is written like a children's book, with scant description and character exposition. It reads to a grown up as: this happened, then this happened, then this happened, then this happened... That's not a criticism, it's just how it is because of the type of book it is. And followed religiously, would have made for a very thin and unmeaty film. More Lambrini than Real Ale.

However, I kept thinking "Oh Jackson has been bold with this!" It's stuffed full of extra things and slight re-imaginings. But all of them did work and made sense to me apart from the Azog thing. I can see that the Radagast interlude is there so unknowing viewers weren't smacked with the Necromancer further into the trilogy without prior warning. And it was fun! The attitude of Thranduil toward the Dwarves also made sense - remember we are soon going to meet some distinctly unfriendly Elves. That Stag was also amazing.

That was one of my favourite details, and I do like the small details. The Blue Wizards line amused me. Gandalf couldn't remember their names - but was he allowed to mention their names given they are owned by the Estate? That little bit was something few would 'get'

And they nearly mentioned the Barrow Downs. I was willing them on...

The Bag End scenes were totally fantastic, both for the huge level of detail (Bullroarer Took's portrait!) of my favourite place in Middle-Earth and for the comedy of the party.
The acting though was something else. Completely superb.

I enjoyed it! I want to see it all again now. Maybe not in 3D because the glasses annoyed me and I ended up getting greasy popcorn salt on them. It didn't play havoc with my eye sight though and I have fairly extreme astigmatism so I don't understand why people were moaning about feeling sick.

12-14-2012, 12:15 PM	#8
Lalwendë A Mere Boggart Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: under the bed Posts: 4,814	Spoilery - You have been warned. Now I have seen it, I can look at stuff about it once more. Phew. I was expecting surprises, and there were a ton of 'em. Let's get my gripe out of the way first. The one thing that I did not like and could not rationalise (there were other things I personally didn't like much but they were rational, coherent etc) was Azog's vendetta. I need to think about that bit some more. I did not like how Jackson chose to recycle motifs from LotR (e.g. the ring falling onto Bilbo's finger and Gandalf asking a moth to bring the eagles - there are a fair few more). But that's just personal. I feel it would have stood up well on its own merits without needing to be self-referential. However, plenty of other geeks lap up this kind of meta stuff so I know why it was there. Ho hum. Oh, and no Burrahobbit joke. Boo. "It was too long!" cried critics. No. It wasn't too long at all. I felt like an hour had passed. "The material is too thin for a film this long!" also cried critics. Hmmm, The Hobbit is a children's book and is written like a children's book, with scant description and character exposition. It reads to a grown up as: this happened, then this happened, then this happened, then this happened... That's not a criticism, it's just how it is because of the type of book it is. And followed religiously, would have made for a very thin and unmeaty film. More Lambrini than Real Ale. However, I kept thinking "Oh Jackson has been bold with this!" It's stuffed full of extra things and slight re-imaginings. But all of them did work and made sense to me apart from the Azog thing. I can see that the Radagast interlude is there so unknowing viewers weren't smacked with the Necromancer further into the trilogy without prior warning. And it was fun! The attitude of Thranduil toward the Dwarves also made sense - remember we are soon going to meet some distinctly unfriendly Elves. That Stag was also amazing. That was one of my favourite details, and I do like the small details. The Blue Wizards line amused me. Gandalf couldn't remember their names - but was he allowed to mention their names given they are owned by the Estate? That little bit was something few would 'get' And they nearly mentioned the Barrow Downs. I was willing them on... The Bag End scenes were totally fantastic, both for the huge level of detail (Bullroarer Took's portrait!) of my favourite place in Middle-Earth and for the comedy of the party. The acting though was something else. Completely superb. I enjoyed it! I want to see it all again now. Maybe not in 3D because the glasses annoyed me and I ended up getting greasy popcorn salt on them. It didn't play havoc with my eye sight though and I have fairly extreme astigmatism so I don't understand why people were moaning about feeling sick. __________________ Gordon's alive!