2013: The Year in Film: "The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug" Review

The first "Hobbit" movie was... a mixed bag, to be certain. For all of its strengths, it felt bloated, far too long and relied on too much CGI. Much of this stemmed from the questionable decision to turn "The Hobbit" into a trilogy and thus a prequel trilogy to "Lord of the Rings".. when the source material is a 200 page children's book as opposed to a 1200 page epic.  So the decision to turn those 200 pages into 9 hours of film resulted in things like... 40 minute dinner parties consisting of 10 minutes of dwarfs throwing plates in zany ways and seemingly endless chases.  There's also the fact that... not much happened in the first film, which basically covered 70 pages of text. So one would thing that, given that ALL of the action was reserved for the last two films, they'd have to be more exciting almost by default.  The first film left our heroes battered but not broken and within sight of the lonely mountain.

We pick up right where the last film left off, with our gang of assorted misfits having left the Misty Mountains behind en route to Erabor.  A large and seemingly infinite band of Orcs is in hot pursuit (seriously, it didn't seem that big to begin with and how many died in the last movie?), as our wayward travelers make their way to the Lonely Mountain. Along the way, they encounter Beorn, spiders, elves, barrels, and approx. 1900000 orcs on the way to the lost dwarven kingdom and the titular dragon.

The Good: Martin Freeman, especially, and the rest of the cast, are very good. Freeman's portrayal of Bilbo is one of the great performances in the entire LOTR/Hobbit film series and he does an excellent job of grounding the otherworldly happenings in a relatable and endearing way. Ian McKellen IS Gandalf at this point, and despite the fact that his character is less capable and powerful than he was when we parted at the end of the LOTR trilogy, he encompasses the spirit of the character so fully that he's basically the wizard archetype at this point. The plot is much more compelling this time around, and doesn't feel as needlessly bloated. Even though Legolas was never in the book, his presence here doesn't seem out of place and actually makes a lot of sense, and it's nice to see a familiar face. Smaug is impressive, and the scenes of Bilbo trying to outwit the dragon are the best in the film.  



The Bad: despite the clear improvement, this film still faces many of the problems of the first installment. Where the LOTR trilogy used CGI in spots, it primarily relied on makeup and practical effects. The Hobbit films have gone full George Lucas on us, using CGI effects and characters to make the proceedings feel an awful lot like a cartoon. Plus, how many times is someone going to fall 50+ feet onto rock and emerge unscathed? The issue of the plot feeling like one long chase remains, even if its not as glaring as it was in the first film, and I'm still forced to ask just how many orcs are chasing them?

If you're a fan of Jackson's interpretation of Tolkien's Middle Earth, you'll like this one as well. It's not as good as any of the Lord of the Rings films, but we knew that going in. Despite way too much CGI, a bloated plot and the most pointless "love" story that's ever been on film, it's still a marked improvement over the first Hobbit film and actually moves at a brisk pace despite the runtime.

7.5/10.