The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug–Film Review

I’ve now seen roughly 2/3rds of Peter Jackson’s The Hobbit and can safely attest his prequel trilogy to his much-beloved LOTR matches the original in terms of special effects and scale. However, in crafting a fresh nine-hour epic, the comparisons — and shortcomings — become as transparent as the person who wears Sauron’s ring.

Despite applauding Jackson’s earlier installment, An Unexpected Journey, I’ve had no inkling to revisit it.  Those reservations ring (pun intended) even more true for the saga’s mid-section.  Despite both films’ dazzling new pathways through Tolkien’s Middle-Earth, imbued with seemingly infinite resources; a dazzling and seamless concoction of practical and digital effects — brought to life with skill and imagination, the whole thing feels forced and unnecessary.  The thrills are placed here not to add to the story but to justify its elongated running time.

Despite this second installment’s near three-hour running time, there is little interest in the human element.  Journey carried at least one: a battle of wits and an emotional conflict between two hobbits, the feeble Hobbit, Biblo Baggins (Martin Freeman) and a tragic figure, Gollum. Smaug picks up immediately after Journey, with Bilbo (Martin Freeman) and his dozen or so Dwarven companions, lead by Thorin (Richard Armitage) fleeing from Orcs while racing against the clock to burgle a precious stone from beneath the Lonely Mountain, which is being guarded by the sleeping dragon, Smaug.  Hopes of an emotional anvil are slowly tossed aside as the focus is once again placed on the single-minded crusade of Thorin, who’s obsessed with reacquiring kingly status and restoring order to his people.  The simplified plot-devise is re-emphasized again and again as if to remind us that the journey is important, despite our best judgement.  Thorin is no Aragorn.

The leaves our title character, Biblo, in the dust, serving as a simple follower who occasionally provides questions of logic and dubious glances.  There is some promise during the film’s first act as Bilbo fiddles with his new possession, the infamous ring-of-power.  We’re teased with Bilbo’s quick fall to the ring’s poisonous effects.  Bilbo tries conceals it from his companions and his wizardry protector, Gandalf (Ian McKellen).  But this plot-point is soon sidestepped either for the final film or left for us to pick up with the superior LOTR saga.

Smaug focuses on many subplots that aim to engage Tolkien purists and elongate the running time to two hours and 40 minutes. Despite the timespan, Smaug feels even less progressive than Journey with the closing credits arriving at a rather jarring moment that will either leave you salivating for more or pissed.  The multiple plot points are either tidbits from Tolkien’s additional Middle-Earth works or creative liberties made by Jackson and crew to appease grander demographics.

As was with LOTR, there’s an enhanced emphasis on the female characters.  A love story is introduced between a female Elf, Tauriel, and a member of Biblo’s Dwaren fellowship. Evageline Lilly (from TV’s Lost) is luminous and captivating as the morally conflicted wood-elf who strays from her people’s predjudice toward Dwarfs, even at the disapproval of her possible love-interest, Legolas, once again played by Orlando Bloom.

Bloom’s return is one of many attempts by Jackson to hearken back to his original saga.  Despite the obvious inclusion, Bloom is remarkably better here than he was in Rings, having a slightly fully face and carrying a greater range of emotions including a gruff rough-around-the-edges mannerism and contempt for other races.  Was his inclusion necessary?  No, but it doesn’t hinder the film either.

Per usual, Legolas is given some of the coolest battle sequences, including an actionized battle between the Elves, Dwarves and Orcs during a chase down river which has the Dwarves riding barrels down treacherous rapids, leaping and narrowing missing blades and arrows along the way. The battle somehow occurs between both water and land with surprisingly inventive — albeit impossible — stunts and maneuvers.  However, it’s all surprisingly fun, despite its obvious attempt to aggrandize mere sentences from Tolkien’s novel into larger-than-life adventure sequences.

However, just like Journey, there are other moments in the end that break beyond the laws of physics and plausibility.  The end of Smaug contains the best scene — followed immediately followed by the worst.  The former has the Smaug’s grand entrance, which is surprisingly tense.  The vocal exchange between the imposing Smaug and the helpless Bilbo is a sight to be had on the large screen.  Smaug himself is an impressive feat of special effects.  His voice and presumably his actions were captured by Benedict Cumberbatch (Sherlock, Star Trek Into Darkness) who chews the scene with each deep baritone syllable.

However, everything soon falls apparent after Smaug finalizes his gloating and engages in a purposeless action sequence that is undermined by amazing coincidences that nearly distinguish all of Smaug’s threat that Jackson worked so hard to suggest.  It’s obvious that this long cat-and-mouse game was written only to create some semblance of a final curtain call.

Smaug, despite its improvements, nevertheless imbued the same sense of apathy.  Once Peter Jackson’s name appeared in the end credits, I felt a sour taste in my throat. This prequel saga is aiming for rollercoaster thrills and spectacle; its emotional canvass is not fully painted, but depends on our memories of better Tolkien films to patch up the missing brush strokes.

The ending of Smaug will leave some wondering why this saga wasn’t simply made into two or even, dare I say, one feature.  With 1977’s animated adaptation, we were presented a 70-minute adaptation, complete with long-winded minstrel songs.  The Hobbit has slowly become a money-grabber by a very desperate studio, which hopes that its bloated budget and set-pieces will be serviceable replacements for faulty pacing and a lethargic story.  The Hobbit remains a much lesser success than Rings in almost every way.

Concerning 3D and 48FPS:

This was my first theatrical experience in 3D AND in the high-speed frame-rate of 48fps.  What is 48fps?  Well, The Hobbit, is the first film shot with twice the number of frames you’d see in a normal theatrical feature.  I gave it a try and walked away with mixed feelings.  For those of you who possess 120mhz televisions, you won’t be daunted by the effect.  However, those unaccustomed or disinterested in this process will notice that the higher frame-rate greatly enhances the clarity and smoothness of the film.  For Jackson’s fast pans and action sequences, I found the effect greatly helped me to follow the action.  However, during the dialog and quieter sequences, simple movements — even a head turn — created a jarring, surreal feel.  Does it actually enhance the film?  During the frenetic scenes? Yes.  But this new digital, high-framerate Hobbit loses something by the added clarity.  I’d argue that 24fps should remain the standard.