"Alright, look. There is only one 'Return' and it ain't 'of the King' it's 'of the Jedi'." Ever since the credits rolled on the final Lord of the Rings film The Force has had a new enemy fanbase besides Star Trek. Uber nerds, like those in Clerks 2, have debated what is the best film trilogy now; Lord of the Rings or the original Star Wars trilogy. Being part Jedi, I've always sided with Star Wars. However, I enjoy watching the first Middle Earth trilogy, but was disappointed with Peter Jackson's prequel trilogy based on The Hobbit.
When word first surfaced, The Hobbit films were supposed to be two films, and directed by Guillermo del Toro. Now that it's over we got three films, and directed by LOTR director, Peter Jackson. Yesterday I finally saw the final Hobbit film; The Battle of the Five Armies. Afterward, I couldn't help thinking how sloppy and uninteresting this trilogy had been. Yes, as a Star Wars fan you can bash me about the prequels all you want, but it doesn't exclude The Hobbit from criticism.
For starters, the characters in this trilogy were far less developed. I could tell you every member of the Fellowship, but I couldn't name you any other dwarves except Thorin. Each hero in the original trilogy had very distinct personalities and moments. In The Hobbit trilogy there was Thorin, the old dwarf, the fat dwarf, the dwarf that loved the elf girl, etc. For all I know some of them could be women.
The Hobbit films being extended out means they had to draw other story elements from Tolkien tales, or just make stuff up. Making three films out of one book means stretching things out, but does that include so many slow-motion swings? In this last film, there was a moment almost every five minutes were a villain was just about to kill a character, reached back very slowly, and was stopped before he could finish his big swing. It was done so many times I knew every time the slow-motion started the character was going to be ok.
This trilogy was not without it's good parts. I actually enjoyed most of Thorin's story and how it ended. I liked Smaug, but felt like they should have completed his story in the second film instead of drawing it out just for tension. If you were late and missed the first five minutes of film three you missed Smaug completely. Now, the best part of these films I thought was Evangeline Lily. She was the best female character I had seen in all six movies. She was an elfish warrior who falls for a dwarf. Tauriel was tough yet compassionate. She stood against her former king because she knew it was the right thing. Just as interesting as a character can get.
I guess my main disappointment with The Hobbit trilogy is that I didn't see anything really new. I saw all the same locations and wide shots to emphasize New Zealand's beauty. All the dwarfs, elves, and orcs seemed the same to me. Oh, and why have a giant worm that can move through mountains if all you use it for is to open holes for orcs to travel? Didn't you ever see Dune or Tremors!
I could go on and on about how boring The Hobbit trilogy was, but I'm going to leave you with one last word; eagles. In LOTR's the eagles came in to save Gandalf in the first film and then Frodo in the third. Then Mr. Jackson decided to use the eagles as a safety net for the entire prequel trilogy. If at any time the dwarfs were in trouble the eagles just showed up and saved the day. They were used as a scape goat then the writers wrote themselves into a corner.
I own the original Lord of the Rings trilogy, and although I think the extended cuts are too much for me, I respect the quality of the films they are. However, I have no desire to see any of The Hobbit films again. This trilogy has come off to me as a cash-grab that became a snore-fest. Peter Jackson made the mistake George Lucas did. Making what should have been one awesome prequel film into three not-so-interesting films.
No comments:
Post a Comment