8 comments on “The Hobbit Finale: Brilliance Stretched Too Thin

  1. Good review Logan. I am happy that the trilogy is over, but it was still a fun time nonetheless. And for the most part, this was a solid send-off.

  2. I quite enjoyed much of this film. It’s easy to identify points that are labored over in excess. Case in point: Thorin’s repeated drugged up look due to his enchantment over the gold. I liken it to the effect the one ring has on Gollum and others, but here it is hammered home far too much. But for the most part those things didn’t bother me because the actors were doing so well with it. The battle scene was especially long but it kept me engaged throughout. Maybe I’m just a sucker for Peter Jackson style films but I liked this one. Good thoughts, Logan.

    • Even to someone who abhors the film, and Peter Jackson in general, it’s really difficult to deny the superb nature of the acting in this film. The acting was phenomenal, but I just thought there was way too much going on, and it felt like a two and a half hour film based on the appendices.

      Plus, I really think it’s a travesty that Bilbo didn’t get more attention. Because Martin Freeman’s performance has really been one of the biggest highlights of this film series for me. But we are in agreement on the acting. It was superb.

  3. “But the problem with stretching a short book into three films is that there just is not good stopping point, and the pacing is doomed to suffer as a result.” Gene’s comment is true but I’d add a bit more. One reason pacing can suffer is that there is just not enough story. For me Rule #1 is “It’s the story, the story, the story.” Rules 2-5 are all “refer to rule one”. After that I can discuss look and acting etc. but if there isn’t a great story to tell – why bother?

    Jackson did a pretty good job being faithful to The Lord of the Rings trilogy in both telling the story and moving each one along a decent pace. He took a thousand pages, boiled it down, and made 3 pretty great movies which, I think, will stand the test of time.

    Here he has taken his own success and let it go to his head thinking that he could take 300 pages and expand it out to make 3 successful movies. Well, I suppose they have been successful at the box office but I haven’t heard much in the way of raves at their being artistic cinematic masterpieces.

    I think most Tolkien fans would have rather have had one really great film faithful to the book than 3 _________________________ films. (you fill in the blank). From the announcement that this would be 3 films I feared I would be disappointed. Regretfully, I was right.

    • I think you’re absolutely right. The Lord of the Rings films were groundbreaking not just because they were good, but they are among the only “nerd” films to win film awards (Return of the King won an Oscar, I believe). But these really had no story. I also think you’re probably right about Jackson getting too confident, although I don’t suppose we can know that for certain. I really hope that the criticism of the Hobbit trilogy will get through to him and he’ll calm down, because he proved with the LOTR films that he really can create great pieces if he has his head on right.

  4. Pingback: Looking Back on 2014: Gene’s Take | Let There Be Movies

  5. Pingback: Looking Back on 2014: Elliott’s Take | Let There Be Movies

Care to Comment?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s