The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

After The Lord of the Rings trilogy went gangbusters at the worldwide box-office a decade ago, it seemed inevitable that an adaptation of The Hobbit would happen. Peter Jackson had tried to get the option to The Hobbit back in 1995, but the rights were held by MGM, who had got the rights from their sister company United Artists, who had optioned it in the 1960's. Unable to do The Hobbit then, Jackson pressed ahead with LOTR. Yet, after LOTR, Jackson sued New Line Cinema because of lost revenue. It seemed Jackson's association with The Hobbit was over, even though MGM tried to go solo with it to no avail. When New Line was swallowed by Warner Bros. The Hobbit restarted, with MGM now on as co-producer, and Jackson was back, but only as producer and writer. He would also select the director, and he found a seemingly great choice with Guillermo Del Toro, it seemed to be an inspired choice, and Jackson and Del Toro spent nearly 2 years developing it. Then, MGM went bankrupt, and Del Toro left the project. With the project in doubt, New Line and MGM asked Jackson again to direct it, which he did, with complete control. However, that wasn't the end of their problems, as there was an industrial dispute in New Zealand which nearly caused the production to be moved to England, thankfully it wasn't, then the big decision came during the editing to turn 2 films into 3. With it's turmoil in development, you'd have thought The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey would have been an unholy mess, but thankfully it isn't. It's a lighter story compared to LOTR, but that's how it was written, and it's very faithful and beautifully filmed with some great performances.

Set 60 years before the events of LOTR happened, Bilbo Baggins (Martin Freeman) is a Hobbit living a quiet existence in Bag End, but he's visited by wizard Gandalf the Grey (Ian McKellen), who remembers how adventurous Bilbo was a youngster, and asks Bilbo to partake in an adventure. Bilbo refuses, but his quiet life is shattered with the arrival of 13 dwarves, Dwalin (Graham McTavish), Balin (Ken Stott), Kíli (Aidan Turner), Fíli (Dean O'Gorman), Dori (Mark Hadlow), Nori (Jed Brophy), Ori (Adam Brown), Óin (John Callen), Glóin (Peter Hambleton), Bofur (James Nesbitt), Bifur (William Kircher), Bombur (Stephen Hunter) and their leader Thorin Oakenshield (Richard Armitage). They hold council, and explain their plan to take back the Lonely Mountain from Smaug the dragon (Benedict Cumberbatch), Bilbo is reluctant, and agrees to go along. Along the way, they encounter danger and eccentric characters, such as Gandalf's old wizard friend Radagast The Brown (Sylvester McCoy), who helps them escape from orc-lord Azog (Manu Bennett), who Thorin had a battle with years before, and they encounter a party of trolls who steal their horses, before making it to Rivendell, then through the mountains where our dwarves encounter The Goblin King (Barry Humphries) and Bilbo meets a strange creature called Gollum (Andy Serkis) who has a ring...

The Lord of the Rings was always going to be a hard act to follow, and while this may not reach the giddy heights of the emotional punch we got when we first saw Fellowship of the Ring for the first time, it's still a brilliant piece of entertainment. It's lighter and funnier than LOTR, but that's the point. It was a book for children, and younger audiences will find much to enjoy with this film, even if it does have an epic running time, but that flies by very quickly. It's a brilliant way to spend a few hours in the cinema, and it's a great return to Middle-Earth, and as soon as you hear Howard Shore's score and his theme for the Shire, you'll have tears in your eyes. It's great to be back in a world you came to know and loved first time around. Here, everyone is younger, the events to come in LOTR haven't happened yet, and it's a more innocent Middle Earth. It's got more emphasis on humour, but that's a good thing, and it's a side we've missed from Peter Jackson since his early days, with some funny dialogue and offbeat characters along the way. The three trolls for example have a touch of what Jackson did in Bad Taste (1987) and Meet The Feebles (1989), even the Goblins have a grossness that could have come from his early films. It has the fingerprints of it's co-writer and original director Guillermo Del Toro on it as well, with it's fantastical elements and brilliant displays of imagination throughout.

Jackson had his work cut out with this one, it seemed silly to have had another director show Middle-Earth before LOTR, and it benefits from tight direction, focused on it's characters, contrasting with some inventive action and a clever script. It's childish at heart, but it never forgets the book, even if it was leaner than Lord of the Rings, it goes into detail with the incidents described in the book. Jackson brought back much of the crew from first time around, including cinemtographer Andrew Lesnie, whose sweeping vistas and epic cinematography brought Middle-Earth to vivid life first time around. Howard Shore puts in another great score as well, one that goes from light and comical one minute to sweeping and epic the next. Plus, as well as revisiting some old locations as seen in Lord of the Rings, Jackson is able to find many more brilliant locations in his native New Zealand, and it shows that LOTR only scratched the surface of this amazing country, and with 2 more films to come, it'll be exciting to see where else amazing that Jackson will find in New Zealand to put on screen. Jackson's team at WETA Digital come up with some brilliant special effects, with Jackson's regular special effects man Richard Taylor overseeing some brilliantly imaginative creatures, locations and characters. All this shows that despite some misgivings the internet community had before release, it adds up to become one of the best films of the year.

Jackson got together a brilliant cast for this one, with Martin Freeman as the young Bilbo, with Ian Holm playing the older Bilbo writing his memories of days gone by while Frodo (Elijah Wood) listens. Freeman puts in a great performance, as the Hobbit out of his element, one who is fussy and is nonplussed when he's eaten out of house and home by the party of dwarves, but despite not being the heroic sort, he comes handy in a crisis. It's great to have McKellen back as Gandalf, more rugged and grubby than what he became in LOTR, but one who can help in a crisis. The dwarves are fun characters, but with the exception of Thorin Oakenshield, their back stories aren't given much attention to, but we have 2 more films to come, so there's time yet, and as a whole, it might all make sense, it's good to see TV regulars like Ken Stott and James Nesbitt in a big production like this. A special mention should be given to Sylvester McCoy as Radagast the Brown, whose eccentric, Pythonesque turn is a standout, and very funny. With the right half of his head caked in bird muck from birds nesting in his hair, it's a character we hope to see again in the next 2 films, and should show there's more to McCoy than Doctor Who, while Barry Humphries is mo-capped up as the Goblin King, a grotesque creature which is a sickly but entertaining creation. But, there's some old friends back, Cate Blanchett as Galadriel, Hugo Weaving as Elrond and Christopher Lee as Saruman the White, all make a good council. Not to mention Andy Serkis (multi-tasking doing the second unit on the film) as Gollum, who has a taste for riddles. It's a brilliant ensemble, with more to come.





For those worrying that it'll be like the Star Wars prequels all over again, dumbed down and pandering to the lowest common denominator, then fear not. This is a faithful and light return to Middle Earth, not as dark as Lord of the Rings, but there should be drama and suspense ahead in the next two films to come. But this bring's J.R.R. Tolkien's world to vivid life once again. Even if he was skeptical of film adaptations and his family may be nonplussed about them, if they took the time to appreciate how Jackson and his cast and crew have brought Middle Earth to life. It's a great piece of entertainment, while it might have been simple to have adapted the book as one film or even two films as planned, Jackson and his team have seen there's potential for a massive epic with it, there's a lot of nooks and cranies in the stories that a bit of padding wouldn't do any harm to. Unable to adapt other Tolkien works to pad it out, Jackson and his team have had use their. But it's a great epic, and it's better than most fantasy epics that have done the rounds since Lord of the Rings left our screens. Time will tell whether it's as good or a worthy companion to Lord of the Rings, but it's still brilliantly entertaining. Even if it is your first time to Middle Earth, it's also a good introduction to this amazing world. Parts 2 and 3 have a lot to live up to.

Great review, Don. Very glad you liked it. Needless to see I'm currently very happy!

Random thoughts

Things I liked

Radagast The Brown
Seeing Ian Holm as Bilbo and Elijah Wood as Frodo
Martin Freeman
Bilbo + Gandalfs first meeting
The Eagles
Elrond, The White Council
Riddles In The Dark
Balin, Fili + Kili
The teasing glimpses of Smaug
The music, though it surprised me how much there was from LOTR


Things I'm Not Sure of

The dwarves, generally not a very likeable bunch, also thought a lot of the time they seemed to big.

Goblin Kingdom - it was a good sequence but perhaps to similar to Moria

I didn't like

Saruman's beard! Looked laughably fake I thought


Generally I liked it, though it felt long, but on first watch no where near the level of LOTR, which I really want to watch now. Can't decide if its 3/5 or 4/5.

Interesting that you mentioned the music, Areas of the internet aren't happy that so much from the official soundtrack release didn't make it into the film yet we had a new version of the Nazgul theme for when Thorin charges at Azog. How that applies I have no idea!

I've not heard the CD score yet but in the film there did seem to be an awful lot of music that was from LOTR, or at least new version of those themes but I'd expected that for the Shire, Rivendell, the Ring etc, especially as they are trying to link these two trilogies. I think what's most noticeable is that there's only really one big new theme, the dwarves. Then again, LOTR has around 80 different themes, and it's only after the Complete Soundtracks were released did I properly figure out about half of them!

I'm very much looking forward to getting the score for Christmas and it'll be interesting to see if there are any official comments in the future about why certain music was used.

I am planning a proper review, maybe when I see it again. I can see why it didn't appeal as much as LOTR did. I think I was so happy to be back in this worlds, it could have been three hours of Bilbo cleaning his house and I'd have probably loved it

Agree about Saruman's beard too!

Interesting about the music, am also looking forward to the soundtrack for Christmas.


Forgot to ask do you know if there was a Peter Jackson cameo? Was looking out for one but didn't spot him.

Didn't see him at all! I've read that he appears in the prologue as a dwarf in Erebor. I'll be on the lookout when I go back.

I've just orded this book



Looks to be the first in a series of Weta books about the Hobbit! I'll let you all know what it's like

On reflection, I think Radagast nearly stole the film, and there wasn't enough of him, I hope he's back for the next 2 films!!

Yeah he was ace. I want him back too!

I hope it gets McCoy more roles, he hasn't been seen much since Doctor Who.

He appeared with McKellen in King Lear on stage in 2007. I wonder if they thought a few years later they'd both be playing wizards?

Less of a review, more of a ramble!








It's been 9 long years since Return of the King and during that time LOTR has, it's fair to say, become a very important part of my life. Exactly how I can't quite describe, I just know that I'm better for it. So a return to Middle Earth was always going to be something to look forward to. But with all the legal and production problems that have set the Hobbit back a considerable number of years, there was every chance that Jackson could have fumbled this second trip to Tolkien and Lucased the precursor story. I'm happy to say that he hasn't.


Here's the good stuff


With LOTR, Jackson Walsh and Boyens did a rather nifty job of condensing the plot into just the story points that dealt with Frodo's quest. Diversions to Gondor, Rohan and Fangorn all dealt, indirectly or not, with the destruction of The One Ring. Possibly the only straying from this path was in the Aragorn and Arwen romance. With The Hobbit, a rather slender tome is now being turned into three epic films and this has been a cause for concern by many. What material exactly would be included? How much would the story be changed to accommodate this extra material? The story of Bilbo and his adventures is, based on An Unexpected Journey, not quite so focussed as Frodo's quest but it still is telling one concise story. It's not quite The Hobbit as we know, it's more The Hobbit and added extra bits of Middle Earth. And this works really well. The tone of the film is, as with the book, very much lighter than LOTR, but there's also a consistency with the earlier films, as new scenes such as the White Council or Radagast's discovery introduce story elements that become major factors 60 years later. And for a three hour film that covers a short segment of a smallish book, the film rattles along at an incredible pace. Others may disagree, but there's no filler here.

With bringing characters into the Hobbit film that never appeared in the books, Peter Jackson has provided himself with a number of problems. One is that An Unexpected Journey now has almost as many principal characters as the entire LOTR trilogy did. Trying to flesh them all out sounded like it would be an impossible task within the time constraints of the film and, as it happens it was an impossible task. With two films to go and even more characters to make their presence, it will be interesting to see if those that suffer in this first film will have their characterisation problems rectified. But even so, there's so much to enjoy from all the performers and the principal characters are given more than enough presence on screen.

It's the dwarves that suffer the most but a few do stand out. And for me greatest on screen is Balin. Oh, damn you Ken Stott for making Balin so likeable. You've just given me one more reason to cry when watching the Fellowship. It's a lovely performance and whether he's head-butting his brother in greeting or telling the group about Thorin's past, Stott is perfect in the role.

As the leader of the merry band of dwarves, Richard Armitage was not my first choice. I doubt he would have been in my top 100 candidates for the role. But he acquits himself well and was certainly better than in any of the TV shows I've seen him in. Thus far, Thorin as written for the screen shows some of the biggest changes of any Hobbit character from the book and Armitage does well in making the somewhat one-note book Thorin into a headstrong, proud, judgemental, noble and loyal heroic figure. These are great changes. When Balin recounts Thorin's battle with Azog and the loss suffered, it's obvious that this is a deeply personal mission about getting their homeland back, not just a quest for some gold. Comparisons with Aragorn are unfair on a specific level but perhaps justified overall. Jackson and the crew changed Aragorn to make him a flawed hero and a grand arc spanning three films, and it looks like Thorin is getting the same treatment. His desire to reclaim Erebor is as much a part of Thorin as the desire to overcome his troubled ancestry was a part of Aragorn.

Apart from the film itself, one of the things I was most looking forward to about the return to Middle Earth was Ian McKellen as Gandalf. As the wizard, both grey and white, McKellen in LOTR gives my second favourite performance of all time. He's superb in the role and I'm happy to say that a decade without his staff and robes has not lessened his performance. He still has that loveable twinkle in his eye, a slightly mischievous nature and an awe-inspiring command of the screen. I seriously wanted to stand up and cheer when he appeared at Bag End.

And speaking of Bag End, what about its inhabitant? I loved Ian Holm as an elderly Bilbo so whoever was cast as Bilbo the younger had a lot to live up to and thankfully Martin Freeman lives up to it well. I've not see him in all that much besides Sherlock, in which he's admittedly great but I was still a bit worried. I needn't have been because he's another perfect casting choice and it's easy to see why the whole shooting schedule was changed to accommodate him. Superb comic timing, the ability to convey an everyman sense of wonder but also excellent during the serious moments. Witness the pivotal scene in which he struggles with whether or not to kill Gollum. It's a sequence that plays right into one of Fellowship’s most heartfelt moments and it had to be perfect and Freeman in on excellent form. Overall he manages to both make the role his own and also be believable when compared to Ian Holm's take. In LOTR, it's easy to believe that Holm and McKellen are playing very old friends. In the Hobbit, it's easy to see Freeman and McKellen as forming a long lasting friendship.

After Bilbo and Gandalf, the other Rings character that had to return was, of course, Gollum An undeniable highlight of the LOTR trilogy, Gollum was a ground-breaking piece of CGI centred on a phenomenal performance from Andy Serkis. The return of both character and actor was always going to be good and the scene in which Gollum appears generally seems to be one of the most popular in this film. As well it should be. As you'd expect, Gollum looks even better than last time and Serkis is just as grand in the role. The stress and confusion in his face when he can't answer a riddle, or realises he's lost the rings is astounding. It's a better performance than most actors will ever give. There's humour; with Gollum answering his own question and telling himself to shut up, and horror; the evil grin as Gollum informs Bilbo how many teeth he has. It's a stunning scene, rivalling any moment with the character in LOTR.


A number of other character from the LOTR trilogy turn up in the Hobbit despite being absent from the book. There is justification for all to be there though and it's nice to see the subtle difference in performance from the actors. Hugo Weaving's Elrond is a noticeably more cheery person. His daughter isn't yet considering suicide, his kin aren't buggering off for parts unknown and Middle Earth isn't falling to wrack and ruin. It's nice to see him like this. Cate Blanchett as Galadriel ends up being just as mystical, beguiling and mysterious as before, but there's a very slight playful side to her here, especially when she's silently communicating with Gandalf, and I love their finale scene together.

It's rare to see Gandalf in awe, and she in return is treating him with the respect he deserves but doesn't seem to always get. Especially from Saruman. It's always good to see Christopher Lee, and I like how, much as in LOTR, it doesn't take him very long at all to start admonishing Gandalf. Lastly we have Elijah Wood as Frodo. Taking a break from seeing imaginary dogs, Wood's return adds very little but does help give is a nice second prologue to the film.

Of the rest of the cast it's McCoy's Radagast that makes the biggest impression. At one with nature, seemingly started at every turn and with amazing poo-filled bird's nest for hair, he's a jovial sort and a character I hope reappears in the next two films. Of the remaining dwarves, James Nesbitt as Bofur and Aidan Turner's Kili probably have the most to do and they do it quite well, with Nesbitt in particular sharing a lovely scene with Martin Freeman

What else. Ah, the music! Howard Shore's score for the LOTR trilogy is, for me, the finest film music of all time. It's close to being the best music of any kind of all time. So the news that he was returning as composer for The Hobbit was very much a cause for celebration. There was cake and hats and everything. And such levity was obviously deserved, because Shore has once again excelled. Now admittedly I have only heard the score once, in the film (compared to what must literally be months of time with the LOTR scores blasting into my ears) so as of yet I'm not fully aware of all the themes that are revisited from Rings and all the news ones that emerged for the first time but even so, it was an amazing listen. Genuine shiver down the spine moments occurred when we heard the theme for The Shire, nature, Rivendell; the One Ring etc. (though it could be argued there are a few too many moments that utilise music from LOTR. More on that later). The main new theme, that for the dwarves, is easily a rival to the big three themes from Rings and the integration of the choir into the score is second to none. I'm eagerly awaiting the soundtrack release, I can't wait to give it a proper listen.

Way back in 2001, Brian Sibley released a book about the making of the Lord Of The Rings trilogy. He recently released a book about the Making of the first Hobbit film. One presumes that two other making of books will follow. Another recently released book is The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey Chronicles: Art and Design. Written by Daniel Falconer, A Weta man who worked on LOTR it’s the first in a series of books about the look and design of the films. And then of course we (hopefully) have the superb documentaries that will accompany the DVD release. What’s all this got to do with anything? Well, this means there’s going to an awful lot of behind the scenes information regarding the new trilogy and this this is most welcome news for folk (me!) who love the look and the character and the world LOTR and The Hobbit 1. Because the recreation of Middle Earth for the second time in a decade is just as stunning to behold as it was the first time. As before entire realms have been meticulously crafted with as much care and attention as an individual character’s costume. Not since Rings can I recall being placed so utterly within the world of the film by the detail of that world as presented. And whilst in the great scheme of story and character such an endeavour is perhaps lower down the scale, it’s still of vital importance. No matter how fleshed out the characters are, if the world they exist in doesn’t ring true, something will always be amiss. Even if you don’t pick up on 90% of the detail, it just feels right. When I wrote my LOTR thread a few years ago I said “I once read regarding LOTR that the films would provide the same impact had all the cast been dressed in jeans and it had been filmed Dogville-style” I doubted that that was true and I doubt the Hobbit would work as well in such a fashion either. Even after 10 years and close to 50 viewings of each film, I’m still picking up details in LOTR. I’d love to be able have the same scenario play out with An Unexpected Journey and I think that will happen.

A few years ago there was a poll on Empire to find the most visually impressive films of all time. All three LOTR films appeared near the top, FOTR deservedly reaching number one. I do believe that were a similar poll to run in the future then An Unexpected Journey would feature highly. Much has been made of the 3D and the decision to shoot at a higher frame rate and that both if these contribute to a poor visual experience. I honestly can't say what they looked like (although I can imagine what the 3D was like) but in glorious 2d, 24 fps the film was gorgeous to behold. Andrew Lesnie, back on duties as cinematographer, once again lights up the screen with the splendours of Middle Earth. Whether it be the lush greenery of Hobbiton, the sweeping beautiful vistas of Middle Earth/New Zealand, gigantic CGI rocks beating the crap out of one another or a return to the spectacular conglomeration of sets, models and CGI that make the ethereal Rivendell, no longer in the autumn of its life, the film is a visual treat. Add to this some of fantastic camera moves - the swirling, sweeping overhead shots motion during the battle with the goblins is spectacular - and you have a film that's every bit as astounding to watch as it's three predecessors.

There's lots of other good stuff and far too much to mention in any one review. The dwarves singing of the Misty Mountains, the fantastic prologue detailing the trials of Erebor, the little glimpses of Smaug, the gobsmacking beautiful costumes and jewellery, the discovery of the swords (I have a Sting, I almost had a Glamdring and I really want an Orcrist). the foreshadowing of the Nazgul's return etc. All very good.

It's not all great though.

The film isn't perfect. As mentioned before a good few dwarves get short changed and barely register. After a good introduction, Dwalin is all but forgotten about. Does Bombur even speak? Some of the CGI is very shonky indeed. I loved the idea of sled bunnies, but they don't look great. The wargs still suffer. Indeed, one of my few hopes when Del Toro was in charge of these films was the promise of rebooted Wargs. The decision to go CGI for a great number of orcs and goblins is an odd choice when you consider the astounding work that the makeup and prosthetics department did in LOTR. Maybe they had too much work to do with 13 dwarves, who knows? And there's a spectacularly odd musical decision made near the end of the film when the music for the Nazgul, not present at all in the film, is used for pivotal heroic scene. For a casual listener it may not be a problem but for someone damn near obsessed with the music for LOTR it sticks out like a sore thumb. But these are all generally little, niggly cosmetic things, and not one of them really takes away from the bigger picture. And it's the big picture that works.


Overall

Like I say, it' not perfect. No film is, not even my beloved LOTR. But it flew by in a massively entertaining, enthralling and, at times, emotional fashion. It's not the same as LOTR but it would seem churlish to criticise this film for that. At the same time it would feel wrong to criticise it for the way it tries to link itself to the previous films because it's done it so well, bridging the gap between the childhood novel of the Hobbit to the epic doom and gloom of Jackson's films. All the parts come together to create a magnificent whole, a whole that desperately leaves me wanting more in a way I haven't really felt since I saw The Two Towers 10 years ago. And I could never have really asked for anything more than that.

Terrific review Gimli. I suspect I will like it more second time, I tend to be guilty of over-expectationitis first time round.

I was listening to the Empire podcast with Philippa Boyens the other day and she talked about falling in love with Middle Earth all over again. That's how I feel at the moment, I'd like to shut myself off for a couple of days and watch the LOTR and read all the Sibley/Fisher companion books and The Art of books which line my LOTR/SW shelf.

It will be interesting to see what's included in part 2, and then how much is left for 3. My sister, as into LOTR as I am (maybe more), would love to see Aragorn's hunt for Gollum which is mentioned in the Appendices but I guess we'd know if Viggo was returning. Unless they've managed to keep it secret. How good would that be? !

That'd be great. I think if they did have Viggo coming back they'd do everything they could to keep it a secret but I doubt it will happen.

You have a shelf dedicated to LOTR and SW?

Gimli The Avenger wrote:

That'd be great. I think if they did have Viggo coming back they'd do everything they could to keep it a secret but I doubt it will happen.

You have a shelf dedicated to LOTR and SW?

I do! Books, DVDs and soundtracks

That's great!

Gimli The Avenger wrote:

I've just orded this book



Looks to be the first in a series of Weta books about the Hobbit! I'll let you all know what it's like

Arrived today and it's lovely! It comes with a replica of Thorin's Map and a 3 page spread of Bilbo's contract! One of the very best "art of" books I've seen. I'd recommend it to any fan of the film.

I'm hoping it comes up here in 48fps, I want to judge for myself what it's like.

I'm still not sure if I want to see it in 48 fps

Silver wrote:

Terrific review Gimli. I suspect I will like it more second time, I tend to be guilty of over-expectationitis first time round.

I was listening to the Empire podcast with Philippa Boyens the other day and she talked about falling in love with Middle Earth all over again. That's how I feel at the moment, I'd like to shut myself off for a couple of days and watch the LOTR and read all the Sibley/Fisher companion books and The Art of books which line my LOTR/SW shelf.

I dug out my LOTR companion books yesterday and realised that Brian Sibley wrote two books for LOTR - The Making of the Trilogy and the Official Movie Guide - but only has the Official Movie Guide for The Hobbit, which actually seems more like the Making of.

I hope he does more for the sequels.