The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (12A)

Film

Fantasy films

Hobbit, the.jpg

Time Out rating:

<strong>Rating: </strong>3/5

User ratings:

<strong>Rating: </strong>3/5
Rate this  

Time Out says

Thu Dec 6 2012

Size isn’t everything, but cinema doesn’t come much bigger in scale than when Peter Jackson is telling tales. It’s a decade since the New Zealand filmmaker unveiled the last of his ‘Lord of the Rings’ films and went on to tackle the ultimate movie giant, ‘King Kong’. Now he’s back in the head of JRR Tolkien and applying the latest in technology to ‘The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey’ (3D and an untried, super-speedy frame rate of 48 frames per second – 24 is usual). It’s the first of three films to be fashioned from the professor’s novel of faux-mediaeval fantasies chronicling how a magic ring (‘the precious’) came to be in the possession of a mere hairy-footed Hobbit in the first place.

The movie may be grand, but lots of its folk are tiny, which makes for unusual juxtapositions, both odd and amusing. Bilbo Baggins (Martin Freeman, squished) is a Hobbit living the pipe-and-slippers dream in the Shire. One night, wizard Gandalf (Ian McKellen, towering over the artificially shortened Freeman) and 13 hungry dwarves – many of them with a knack for annoying the audience – come knocking and persuade Bilbo to join them on a quest to win back their kingdom. So begins a journey across wild terrain and back-to-back run-ins with vicious creatures. And all the while Bilbo is wondering what the hell he’s got himself into.

Many have wondered exactly how Jackson has found three movies in one novel. The answer is he opts for the detail and pacing of an extended TV series – an approach that has drawbacks over more than two-and-a-half hours. The initial coming-together of Bilbo and the dwarves feels overlong, and the start of their journey is sluggish and lacks a sense of momentum. There’s a tonal problem, too, as the early dominance of  knockabout comedy gives the film an alienating whiff of kids’ TV (not helped by the softly-softly, artificial look of the set for the Shire). Only a flashback showing the loss of the dwarves’ kingdom recalls how breathtaking these films can be.

It’s during the film’s final third that, at last, we feel a true sense of peril and the dwarves’ journey starts to feel purposeful. The turning point is the entry of Gollum. The more dark it becomes, the more ‘The Hobbit’ becomes compelling as a story, and finds a fitting tone. It doesn’t help that the earlier, lighter scenes (lighter in look, as well as feel) seem overexposed. Or that some outdoor scenes look rooted to a studio set – a knock-on, you assume, of the fast frame rate, which can feel like watching a movie on a shoddy HD TV.

Thank Hobbitses for Gollum, then. And thank Hobbitses for the film’s more involving later scenes, including a showdown between two stone giants and a run-in with a villain who rivals Jabba the Hutt in the beauty stakes. It’s scenes such as these that leave you looking forward to the next one rather than wanting to strangle one of the more annoying dwarves or at least bury him in a hole and leave him behind in the Shire.

34

Comments

Add +

Release details

Rated:

12A

UK release:

Thu Dec 13, 2012

Share your thoughts
  1. * mandatory fields

Comments & ratings

Rated as: 3/5 (24 ratings)
  • I ain`t seen the movie either, Pedro!

    Pedro Almodovar Sat Dec 15 2012
    Rated as: 1/5
    Report
  • I ain`t seen the movie either, Levi!

    Levi Strauss Sat Dec 15 2012
    Rated as: 1/5
    Report
  • And one more thing.... I saw this in 3D and in my opinion a total waste of time. There are only about 2-3 times in the film when you remember you are actually watching 3D. So the annoyance of having to wear stupid 3D glasses to watch a film is not balanced out by the experience.

    TrollyDash Sat Dec 15 2012
    Report
  • Good, but not great. I am a huge fan of the first 3 films which were great compared to this latest offering. Even my patience was tested for the first hour as it was tediously slow at times. Picked up in the middle and finished on a high,leaving you wanting to see what happens next. However, many will notice a very similar generic (almost copy and paste) repeating story line. Even some of the cinematography was the same as (for example) when they escaped the bridge of doom in LOTR, they used the same walking over the mountain range when they escape a mine in the Hobbit. Very similar, but different. Still very watchable and if you are a fan, then it is a mandatory must-see. Would have given it 3 1/2 stars if I could and hoping for better films in the Trilogy,

    TrollyDash Sat Dec 15 2012
    Rated as: 4/5
    Report
  • I've just seen the film. I wanted so much to like it, but sadly, no. Much of it comes over as a hugely extended video game. Less of the dwarves, fewer battle and chase scenes would have tightened the structure. It's called "The Hobbit", but too often Martin Freeman is backgrounded to spectacle. The film is at its best when he comes to the fore eg the riddles in the dark sequence. From prior reports, the length was to allow character development, but where LOTR scored in that department, this feels thin, and long for length's sake. Hopefully PJ will look back on it, realise his error and release a tight two and a half hour version of the entire trilogy in the future. BTW this review is of the 2D version. Nothing to be gained in seeing it in 3D, I fear.

    oddingle Fri Dec 14 2012
    Report
  • The review has it about right. Overall it is a disappointment and the longer the film goes on, and in places it does drag, the more I am convinced that the decision to stretch the originally planned two films to three is about box office revenue and filling film opening slots than actual merit. The filling and stretching isn't as bad as in the last two Twilight films but this will win no awards other than possibly a few for technical excellence. I was in a virtually empty large screen with just a few that looked die hard fans and there was no sense of excitement from anyone as they came out. I fear this will be much like the Star Wars prequels with two disappointing films giving clues to an eventual crescendo in the last half of the third. As a film its like a supermodel great to look at, though the 3D does get to your eyes before the end, but all a bit empty. Worth 3 stars as an event but struggling to get much above 2 when it comes to plot. Probably 6 out of ten. Must do better in the next film.

    Ian Fri Dec 14 2012
    Rated as: 3/5
    Report
  • I really wish people would not rate a film without seeing it.......

    JayneM Thu Dec 13 2012
    Report
  • I loved the review, but lets see about the movie

    Pedro Thu Dec 13 2012
    Rated as: 4/5
    Report
  • I oved the review< but lets see about the movie

    Pedro Thu Dec 13 2012
    Rated as: 3/5
    Report
  • This person has clearly forgotten that this movie has been adapted from a CHILDRENS book,

    sandy Wed Dec 12 2012
    Report
  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  • Hotwise
  • Cool brands
  • Star