 |
| Martin Freeman. Swoon. |
Having read the book about 10 years ago and having seen the 1977 Rankin/Bass animated movie dozens of times as a child, plus all of the extra nerdy stuff boyfriend knows about the world of Middle Earth, I felt like I was familiar with The Hobbit. Either my mind is going in my old age, or Peter Jackson et al delved into even more detail than some may deem necessary and produced an epic tale of friendship and adventure. I like to think it's the latter. An Unexpected Journey goes into far more detail and history than I ever thought it would. To the casual viewer this probably seems tedious and excessive, or even a bit greedy to squeeze every ounce of detail out of it to stretch it into 3 movies so that the studio can make more money. While I was expecting to really enjoy the movie today, I did think a Hobbit trilogy seemed like a bit much; I would have been satisfied with 2 movies. But after mulling it over in my brain and enjoying the crap out of this movie, I'm satisfied and think that a Hobbit trilogy is in the capable and safe hands of Peter Jackson.
Everyone in the industry has been curious about the high frame rate in which the movie was filmed in. Again, Googling this leads to a slew of criticism about the HFR in which The Hobbit was filmed. There are reports/rumors of people getting nauseous and throwing up, etc. I have mixed feelings about the HFR. Normally I am not a fan of watching movies in 3D, I tend to get a headache or my eyes start to sting about 45 minutes into the movie. However, The 3D did not bother me today. It's very subtle and artistically done. The 3D adds an element of depth and texture to the film that I think is charming and fun-exactly what you want to feel with this story. I think Peter Jackson used the 3D element in a wonderful way. There were times when the action was slightly off center of the frame and you would be focused on that and then suddenly a bat or a bird or a piece of debris would fly past in the foreground and it was amazing, it was like watching what was happening to through a window. The HFR only added to this...most of the time. Because our eyes are not used to viewing movies at such a high quality in "real time" it's very difficult to get used to seeing. It took me about 30 minutes to adjust to the picture quality. I've heard some people complaining that it looks "too real" and I don't understand how that's possible. For me, the first half hour looked funny because the HFR almost made it feel like everything was moving too quickly. It appeared as though someone accidentally hit the fast-forward button and everything moved just a hair too fast to feel natural. However, once my eyes adjusted, it was quite beautiful. This leads to why I am torn about the HFR. It's awesome on Mythbusters and for action movies when they slow things down and you can see details, but when you're watching an action sequence at 48 frames per second and it never slows down at all, it's overwhelming. This is my one complaint about The Hobbit; for the slow sweeping shots, or close-ups of people talking, or the wide shots of scenery, the high frame rate makes a gorgeous movie, but in the scenes with battles or quick cuts and lots of action and large movement the additional frames can make you feel a little uncomfortable in the tummy. Going into the movie I snorted at the rumors of people throwing up watching this movie, but for the first half hour, I could understand how someone of a lesser constitution than I might feel queezy or ill. My opinion of the 48 FPS is it looks gorgeous and amazing, but I was painfully aware of it throughout the movie and thus, it took me out of the universe I was trying to be immersed in and, in turn, drew me out of the experience. I can't stress enough how great it looks, but it is just not my cup of tea. I expected to love this movie going into it. I think I did, but the high frame rate was quite distracting, so I can't tell how much I liked it. I plan to see the movie again in the regular 24 FPS for comparison. I'm confident it will be just as beautiful and I will enjoy it even more.
All technology aside, overall the movie was enjoyable and entertaining. Ian Holm and Elijah Wood make a short and sweet cameo which I thought was delightful. This is not a spoiler because it's on the IMDB page and it's in the first 30 minutes. Please don't send me hate mail. Ian McKellen is still a wonderful Gandalf, as expected. I love Martin Freeman. He is the perfect Bilbo. I was pleasantly surprised that all of the dwarves, while looking and behaving as dwarves ought, are all different enough in character and costume detail that they do not overwhelm you, like too many Gimlis. I couldn't handle 3 hours with 13 versions of Gimli. I don't love Gimli; in all honesty, he's my least favorite character in LOTR. Please don't send me hate mail.
So, to sum up:
-HFR IMAX 3D is beautiful but can get overwhelming during the action sequences. I suggest not seeing the movie after a large meal.
-Peter Jackson has created more depth and brought to life so much, I really like to think Tolkien would approve.
-I love Martin Freeman.
-Please don't send me hate mail.
On my patented scale, I give Peter Jackson's The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey 4.5 out of 5 Hobbit feet. (Or in this case, I guess 9 out of 10 since the feet are in pairs...eh- 6 of one half a dozen of the other...)
 |
| Source |
Also, I saw The Hobbit with my buddies Vash and Justin who do a review show on YouTube. Check out their stuff, it's funny. Please don't send Vash hate mail either.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Trolls will be deleted.