OUR RATING SYSTEM
(*****) = do NOT miss! This one is as good as they come.
(****) = Fantastic - It's worth the price of the ticket (and then some).
(***) = Average - Nothing really bad, nothing really spectacular...
(**) = Perhaps you should find another movie to see.
(*) =
The bottom of the barrel. It would be hard to find something less entertaining or more unworthy of your time.



Maureen
(Mo) holds a PhD in marine geophysics (Dr. Maureen, to you) and works for the U.S. Geological Survey in Santa Cruz, CA. Maureen enjoys the outdoors (skiing, swimming, hiking, camping), dogs, cooking, singing, getting into (and out of) uncomfortable situations, and most importantly, watching quality movies. She makes a point of seeing as many Oscar-nominated films as possible each year and (correctly) predicting the winners. Her role on this blog is primarily as an advisor, collaborator, and "chime in"-er.

John (Jo) holds a Bachelor's Degree in Nursing, as well as a Bachelor of Arts degree in Film Studies. He currently lives in Chicago, Illinois and works as a nurse. His one true obsession in life is movies... The good, the bad, and everything in between. Other than that, he is busy caring for his cat, painting, writing, exploring Chicago, and debating on whether or not to worship Tilda Swinton as a deity. John is the master and commander and primary author of this blog.

Sunday, December 16, 2012

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (Jo***)


The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, is an unexpected stumble from the gifted Peter Jackson, who's original Middle Earth trilogy managed to win just about every Oscar possible back in 2003. Back at the helm, and divided into yet another trilogy, the quaint Hobbit novel is being transformed into something it is not:  a story massive enough to span three 3-hour films. Just because you have the power to make something, doesn't necessarily make it good. The Hobbit, though, is full of remarkable images, places, and moments, but the sum of their parts is little more than icing on a burnt cake. It might look good, but it's flawed all the way to the center. 

The story begins in present time (or not?) when the elder Bilbo begins writing down the tale 'There And Back Again,' and Jackson cleverly tries to tie in the original trilogy, with an immediate eye-rolling cameo from Elijah Wood (who is not the only returning cast member). We see this is the day of his long expected party from 'Fellowship,' just moments before Gandalf arrives on his carriage. The film does offer lots of nostalgia in that regard, but for a 3 hour movie with its own story to tell, it's clear the writers (the original crew in addition to Guillermo Del Toro) had wiggle room to add what they wished. 

The cast is superb, but it lacks the charisma an charm of the original Fellowship. The 13 dwarves all seem to have their own personality, but there is absolutely NOT enough screen time for each of them, and we only get to know maybe 3 or 4 as characters. The rest are merely fillers. 

Middle Earth is just as we left it: green, lush, but dangerous at every turn. The design of the landscape is no less impressive, as is the technical aspects behind the film - from costumes to makeup. It is clear no detail went unnoticed. Take, for instance, one of the final battle scenes - set in an underground system of caves inhabited by thousands of goblins. Our heroes run through mazes of tunnels and bridges, effortlessly navigating foreign terrain, and the audience is simply overwhelmed by the details put into each shot. It is truly remarkable even to such minute details. 

It must be said about the battle scenes though, more than Lord of the Rings, that the sense of danger is almost always lost. The choreography of each sword swing or punch is so perfectly timed, as are the dwarves narrow escape from certain death time and again. How is it that amid those thousand goblins, the dwarves manage to kill hundreds, while their small group of a dozen escapes unharmed?

And then to the high frame rate… Oh goodness. Of course I had to check out the film at 48 frames a second - its a whole new novelty to the filmgoing experience. I had an idea what to expect, but there is no amount of preparation that can prepare you for the feeling. It is truly jarring for the first few minutes - almost to the point that I considered telling the projectionist that they were playing the film too fast. The image quality is stunning, but the actual movement on screen really does feel like a video game or television show. There is something beautiful about the motion blurs now lost from 24 frames a second, and this new clarity is almost too much. Visual effects become all the more blatant, as do green-screen effects. There were several times throughout the film that it felt like I was watching special effects from 1980's, but there were also times I was amazed at what I was seeing. Do I think this will become the new standard? I can't say for sure, but I sincerely hope not. Seeing a movie like this at 48 frames a second is like getting a sneak peak at the making of a movie - you KNOW you're watching actors running around manmade sets, it takes you out of the experience. 

Overall, what can I say. Perhaps a year or 2 from now when the other films are released, I will have a better grasp of The Hobbit as a whole. It is clear the filmmakers are still clinging to the original trilogy as a crutch-assuming it will aid these films. Howard Shore's score has entire sections pulled from the original film - and usually poorly done. The Hobbit could have been a much more unique and invigorating experience. As of now, I am left somewhat disappointed, confused, and yet still curious for more.

(Awards potential: Best Cinematography, Best Art Direction, Best Visual Effects, Best Makeup, Best Sound Editing)

No comments:

Post a Comment