Rating : 6/10
Release Date : 14th December, 2012
Time : 169 minutes
Director : Peter Jackson; Writers : Fran Walsh, Philippa Boyens, Peter Jackson & Guillermo Del Toro, based on the novel ‘Hobbit’ by JRR Tolkien; Music: Howard Shore
Starring : Martin Freeman, Ian McKellen, Richard Armitage, Ken Stott, James Nesbitt, Adam Brown, Cate Blanchett, Christopher Lee, Andy Serkis, Barry Humphries, Manu Bennett
I haven’t read Lord of the Rings, nor seen any of the films (I think I may have seen the first one but got bored of the special effects). I liked the fact this film delved more into the human angle, the who, the why rather than just the action. But in doing so, it became quite slow, lengthy, drawn out and quite predictable.
Bilbo Baggins (Martin Freeman), the Hobbit, is picked by Gandalf (Ian McKellen), the Wizard, to help a gang of dwarves, led by their King Thorin (Richard Armitage) reclaim their kingdom from a dragon. Gandalf feels Bilbo has lost the sense of adventure he used to possess as a child and is in need of one. Bilbo resists, objecting to how the dwarves eat, use the furniture, drink and behave, even spoiling his mother’s lace doily. But then eventually joins the motely crew. Elves, Goblins, magical swords, forests under a spell, bloodthirsty Orc’s astride giant wolves, and a mysterious ring which gives the wearer certain powers all ensure the sought after adventure doesn’t disappoint.
Great special effects, stunning landscapes and cinematography ensure the film works visually. But the pace is slow to begin with and flags a couple of times in the middle. Also, there is an air of predictability about the way most of the enemy encounters shape up, with the usual suspects coming to the rescue. Also, possibly because I haven’t read the book, I wasn’t able to emotionally connect too much with any of the characters, though I was rooting for the brave, hardy dwarf king a bit by the end.
Am not sure about taking kids below ten for the film, with some of the creatures shown likely to pay them a visit during the night. However, if you do intend to see it, there is no better place to do so than a theatre. This one is not made for watching on the telly.
7 comments:
I don't agree with you this time.. this movie was amazing...
please watch the previous parts then review... you did the same with X-men First Class...
for certain movies you gotta know what's happening... when you said a "mysterious ring" that line made me sad...
this is certainly a 8 Star movie... I was having a conversation with my brother yesterday and we were right, in fact people Peter Jackson was right in not promoting hobbit in India cause 90% of people never understand classic movies...
and Yes offense... this time I got pissed....
I dont think for any movie maker who's making a film of a book, the movie should work only for those who've read the book ? Or those who've seen earlier parts (i thought this was a fresh trilogy, which is the only reason I went for it) ? Isnt the whole idea to get new audiences ? Take the new star trek movie (which is built off the tv series) - my son & I saw it (I'd never seen the earlier films, had of course seen the tv show & he's never seen anything) - but we both loved it - it had something for those who knew and something for those who didnt. But it didnt rely on pre-knowledge
first of all Hobbit is not a reboot .. it is a prequel, there is a difference...
The sequence where Bilbo steals from Gollum in his cave that was a huge moment.. it told us how he got the ring in the first place, the mysterious ring about which 3 movies were made(it was called Lord of the Rings for a reason), one of which won 11 Oscars... but I think that doesn't matter here..
probably Elijah wood's sequence didn't meant anything to you either cause you didn't saw the previous parts...
Star trek was a reboot not a prequel... so everyone one was meant to fully enjoy it...
there is one more thing when directors try to reboot a movie series people still have problems with them... when Marc Webb made The Amazing Spider-Man most people were complaining we don't wanna know again and again how he got turned into a half spider we already know that...
that's the thing sometimes you know whats happening already and sometimes you need to know!!!
We're not really disagreeing here, since thats why I the first line of my review reads the way it does. My basic comment is it should be created for everyone - incl those who havent read. The fact that those who've read have greater enjoyment is absolutely fine. Which is why my rating is 6 and yours 8. However, maybe they could have made it in such a way that the gap was lower. Take another franchise, Star Wars. When they came up with the new ones, my son, who's never seen the earlier ones, really enjoyed it (probably a 8 for him) while I did it probably a little more (since I knew more and would give it a 9).
okay I also agree there.. but its the people who start blaming the directors for telling the same thing over and aver again...
all I mean its not just a visually rich film... Hollywood makes 20 of those in a year... it was a lot more..
for me this years best films were Life of Pi and Dark Knight Rises... and I would give hobbit the same place...
I loved Amazing Spiderman. Was concerned before I went in that it was too soon to be re-making but had no such issues after watching. It was almost a completely different film, the characters were very differerent. Loved Life of Pi & am out of superlatives for Dark Knight Rises !
but people still were upset..and still it didn't got the reaction they expected...
if they had continued with Sam Raimi's series and made another Spider-man movie with Tobey Maguire and rest of the cast it would have made more money than The Amazing Spider-Man(even though Sam's adaptation wasn't that good.. third part sucked).. I am not saying box office result tells if a movie is good or not.. but it matters none the less...and I think you know that better more than anyone atleast more than me...
Post a Comment