Movie Review: The Hobbit: Battle of the Five Armies

Hey there Chaos fans and fanatics! We here at the Eye of Terror hope that you all had a great holiday and that you got plenty of Chaos-goodies in your stockings or under your tree or whatever. I know I sure did- my wonderful (and understanding) wife got me the Sector Imperialis battleboard! Wow! This thing is huge and very nicely detailed. I'm so excited that I have already started to paint them! My wife is the best (or an enabler, depends on how one views the plastic crack habit that is 40K). In addition to that, I have been working on several projects, some of which I will show on this site later this week.

At any rate, my wife and I saw Hobbit 3 just over a week ago, so I decided I'd do a small-ish review. So, without further ado:

The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies

As my long time readers may remember, I love the original Lord of the Rings movies. Each of those films are both personal and epic, filled with action, emotion, and character. These three movies elevated "fantasy" films to an art form. The LoTR trilogy is without peer. I suppose, one day, I should review them on this site--- if only I had the time!

As my long time readers will also remember, I have been less than satisfied with The Hobbit films. I thought that Unexpected Journey was just awful (see review HERE). Total lack of characterization, tension, respect, filled with stupid CGI battle scenes- yikes. Though it had some good points, UJ was a letdown in nearly every respect. I have very rarely emerged from a movie so completely disappointed. A year later, Desolation of Smaug hit theaters (see my review HERE). While still not as good as LoTR, it was light years ahead of UJ- it felt much closer to the feel of LoTR, and Smaug himself was a fantastic creation, a worthy addition to the entire Middle Earth Saga. The movie had a bigger theme, had some good character beats, and felt like a more fulfilling experience. I left the theater excited for the 3rd part. Would Five Armies manage to keep up the momentum built up by
DoS?

Well, the answer is sadly mixed. Five Armies starts out promisingly enough- Smaug takes his frustration out on Laketown, with only Bard standing in his way. It is a fantastic scene, and Bard come across as both brave and desperate to stop the murderous dragon. The confrontation makes for a thrilling start to the film, but the movie never builds on it, unfortunately. Nothing that follows is quite as exciting or well done as the incineration of Laketown, which hurts the remaining two hours of film time. The remaining film is entertaining, but never rises to such heights as DoS or the rest of LoTR.

While the movie moves much faster than UJ, it has similar problems. Bilbo is pretty much a side character, which seems to defeat the entire purpose of the series. Martin Freedman does the best he can, but the focus is placed on others, and thus Peter Jackson himself seems to forget it was the 4 Hobbits which made LoTR, not the action scenes or special effects. Gandalf is similarly relegated to the sidelines, though his rescue from the Necromancer is thrilling (the only part that comes close to the battle with Smaug)- its great to see the White Council in action, and Jackson is smart enough to barely hint at Saruman's eventual fall rather than telegraphing it (sadly, Jackson poorly telegraphs everything else that will lead to LoTR).

The weakness is again the Dwarves. None have been developed well at all. Balin (my favorite from the other two, acting as the conscience of Thorin) barely gets any time. Killi is still in love with Tauriel (absurdly, in my opinion, and the resolution to that tries to be dramatic but just feels unearned). The other Dwarves are still just bodies. They add nothing to the proceedings. Ironically, a new Dwarf King, Dain, introduced in the midst of the "Battle", has more verve and character than the Dwarves we have been with since the start, and that must tell you something.

The only Dwarf developed at all is Thorin, and here is where the film truly goes awry. DoS built up the theme of greed as a corrupting influence. Now that Thorin has reclaimed his kingdom, what will he do next? The answer is that he suddenly becomes a greedy, selfish, and paranoid nutjob. And why? No, its not a moral failing- its only "Dragon-Sickness". Ugh. So suddenly Thorin isn't responsible for his own actions, and he just as suddenly recovers from his "Dragon-Sickness" just in time to save the day. Cartoonish and convenient, exactly the opposite of his development in UJ and DoS. Thus, when his heroic moment and sacrifice comes, it again feels odd and unearned. I think it would have been better to tone down his "Dragon-sickness" and instead build up his fears of losing his Kingdom again- walking a fine line between legitimate concern and selfishness.

Legolas and Tauriel do fine here, and Legolas' arc seems to be what I thought earlier- he awakens to the needs of all Middle Earth, not just his kingdom and his father. Thranduil fares worse though. His selfishness hits new heights (which is fine), but toward the end he suddenly reverses himself and becomes nice, even sending Legolas on a mission to find Aragorn (talk about telegraphing- not only did I groan, but it makes no plot or character sense to have Thranduil change so suddenly and without good enough reason).

Bard and the people of Laketown get the shaft as well. After defeating the dragon, Bard becomes the leader of Laketown's survivors. Luke Evans does well: he's a family man put in a tough situation. Where can his people go? How will they survive? Don't the Dwarves owe all the people some help? Bard becomes a reluctant warrior, willing to fight to keep his people safe. He is a welcome addition to the story, even if there are shades of Aragorn in his character. Sadly, once the "Battle" is finished, the movie suddenly forgets Bard and his people- what happens to them now? Do the Dwarves, Elves, and Men make an accord? Who knows? Once the "Battle" ends, Jackson decides to run back to the Shire as quickly as possible, seemingly afraid of having too many endings...

Which brings me to the end. Once Azog is killed the battle comes to a sudden end (almost inexplicably abrupt, the more I think of it). The movie swiftly concludes with Gandalf and Bilbo going back to the Shire. Their relationship, which was so warm in LoTR, is virtually non-existent here. Again, Jackson telegraphs the influence of the ring too much, and Gandalf seems VERY suspicious. Huh? Then why the hell does he wait DECADES to do something about it? The worst of it is, though, the film ends with LoTR Bilbo (Ian Holm) greeting Gandalf just before the birthday party in Fellowship. But because Gandalf and Bilbo had little to no relationship develop in the Hobbit trilogy, this ending just feels hollow and reminds you that LoTR are such better films.

Despite my many complaints, there are certainly things to recommend the film. The movie moves quickly, with very little drag, which makes it better than UJ immediately. The actors do their best, even the sidelined Martin Freedman (seriously, it is not his fault). The action pieces are fairly well done. While there is a ton of CGI, you expect it in the larger battles, and it works, with the action not being cartoonish (as it was in UJ)- plus the "Battle" has some stakes, which helps. Watching a Dwarf army go to war is interesting and unexpected in its execution- and I loved it when Daine's dwarves formed a phalanx against the charging Orcs! The single combat between Thorin and Azog is good (though it reminded me of Batman Begins. Seriously- watch and you'll see the resemblance, trust me).

Overall, "Battle" was a fun time at the theater, but as part of the Middle Earth saga, I expect more than that. Way more. So, since I liked it more than Unexpected Journey but less than Desolation of Smaug, I'll give it 2 1/2 Marks of Chaos out of 4.

So, The Hobbit trilogy is now closed, and it was a decidedly mixed bag, at best. It's too bad, because I love LoTR so much that I'd love to spend more time in Middle Earth. Unfortunately, The Hobbit trilogy ultimately forgot so much of what made LoTR so good: the big and the small, the grandiose and the subtle, the personal and the historic- those in combinations made LoTR shine, and the Hobbit lacked so much of it.

Ah well. I think I'll fire up the LoTR blu rays to make me feel better. Now THERE'S a saga well told...

"I wish none of this had happened".

"So do all who see such times, but that is not for them to decide. All we can decide is what to do with the time that is given to us". 

Until next time!

  

Movie Review: The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug

Hey there, my fellow followers of the Ruinous Powers. Old Man Chaos is back with a (somewhat brief) review of The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug, which I shall just call Hobbit DOS just for short). Shall we begin?

OK. Let me be honest. I was very disappointed with Hobbit 1. As a guy who loved Lord of The Rings trilogy, seeing them as the pinnacle of what film-making could accomplish in terms of story, characterization, and special effects, it is understandable that my expectations were quite high for the adaptation of The Hobbit. Now, I knew that there was no way it could live up to LOTR (how could it, it's a single story, lighter in tone), but I was unprepared for just how bad Hobbit UJ turned out to be. I hated it. I have never felt so dejected about a movie (even, believe it or not, Episode I)- I left the theater not wanting to see it again (I saw each of the LOTR movies multiple times in the theater). My original review is HERE - it captures my disappointment and bitterness quite well. A few weeks ago, they released Hobbit UJ Extended Edition, and I decided to pick it up and give it another try. It was telling that the extended cut is only like 10 minutes more footage. At any rate, upon watching it, my opinion remained largely unchanged. My complaints about Hobbit UJ remained, despite my giving it a second chance. At this point, I felt little desire to see Hobbit DOS.


However, last week some reviews began to appear on line. Although they varied in their enthusiasm, the consensus seemed to be that Hobbit DOS was a great improvement over the first. Now, I was torn. I wanted this movie to be good. Perhaps Hobbit UJ was just a fluke. Maybe it was just "ring-rust" that Jackson and company had to work through. Or... was Hobbit DOS destined to fail? Were the reviewers just so elated that Hobbit DOS wasn't the train-wreck that the first was, that they let their positive hyperbole get the better of them? Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me...

Bilbo wasn't too happy with the first movie either

Luckily, that was not the case. Hobbit DOS was pretty darn good. Now, it at no point reached the stately, graceful power of the LOTR movies. However, it was a really good, fun, action packed, and at times contemplative film. Gone were the inane attempts at humor, the slap-stick, the fart/bleach jokes, the "forced" moments that meandered and moved along at a snails pace. Instead, we have a  movie that has a mission, and pretty much sticks to it throughout. The characters- even a few of those 13 dwarves, are developed a bit more, while new characters add some much needed depth and contrast. The action is almost constant, with many deeds of daring do, and the stakes are getting higher. Finally, there is a theme emerging here, which I did not expect, which the dragon Smaug ties into perfectly- how greed destroys you from within.

Let's take a few things in turn. First, the action sequences are plainly better. In Hobbit UJ, the few action scenes there were simply were stupid. The fight in the Goblin kingdom was the height of it- no danger, no menace, with a compete disregard for the gritty semi-realism that made LOTR so powerful. In DOS, the action scenes are frantic, with injuries occurring and at all times there is a real threat. From the Mirkwood spiders to the barrel chase to the confrontation with Smaug, their journey is fraught with risk and danger. The action scenes (mostly) mean something to the plot, and characters change as a result of these perils. There's one or two bits that echo UJ, but those are few, and the rest more than makes up for those deficiencies. 

Now, about the characters. Bilbo certainly shines in the first part and the last part (admittedly he gets a little lost in the shuffle in the middle section). Bilbo is clearly becoming braver, more shrewd. He saves the dwarves single- handed in more than one instance. His confrontation with the Mirkwood spiders was a real highlight for me, and his "escape plan" in the barrels is amusing and cunning all at once. Then, at the end, his "confrontation" with Smaug is just wonderful (more on that later). However, Jackson carefully posits the question- is Bilbo getting braver, or is it the ring already manipulating him? A great moral shading here, and well handled.

Some of the dwarves are also given more to do. Thorin, of course, is a strong presence here, being brave but also facing impossible odds- it hangs heavily upon him. His decision to abandon an injured comrade is both sad but very believable. However, Jackson again adds some shading here- is Thorin doing right by his people, or is it "personal"? Does he want to restore his homeland for his people, or does he simply want to be king again, whatever the cost?

The new characters get plenty, and are indeed essential to the theme that Jackson seems to be working on here. The first is Thranduil, the king of the wood elves. His elf king is all but detached from the world, and this is due to an underlying selfishness- the troubles of the world are not for him to get involved in. He simply wants to carry on as he has been. His son, Legolas (back from LOTR in a big role, as it turns out) generally agrees with his father, but his views are tested by Tauriel (well-played by Evangeline Lilly) a female elf that realizes the need to help others and begs Legolas to look beyond to the rest of the world (thus, Legolas will have a transforming arc, which is quite interesting). Finally, there's the people of Laketown, notably Bard, an honest man who has a great doubt gnawing at him; and the greedy and corpulent "Master of Laketown", who decides to aid the dwarves for selfish reasons. All these new roles are preformed very well, adding some great new characters to Jackson's cinematic universe. Lee Pace in particular is great as Thranduil- selfish, uncaring, and short-sighted. He is a great contrast to the wise Elrond and the inspiring Galadriel and the actor plays him very well.

Now, let's get to the titular dragon and the theme of the movie (indeed- the whole Hobbit trilogy?). If it plays out as it looks to, Gandalf is aware that Sauron is trying to return (in the form of the mysterious Necromancer- who is realized by a brilliant special effect). Now, Gandalf goes to investigate this Necromancer- and his fears are realized. What is allowing Sauron to make his return? Greed and selfishness. At the end of DOS it hit me how many of the characters are motivated by greed or entirely selfish needs: Thurandril and (initially) Legolas, Thorin, the "Master of Laketown", the people of Laketown, and, of course, Smaug. These are contrasted by characters who act to help others, who want to aid those in need, including Bilbo, Balin, Tauriel, Bard, and of course, Gandalf (he sees farther than all the others, admittedly, but he is motivated to help all of Middle Earth).

This shot has more thematic importance than might be guessed at first glance

Greed and selfishness have driven the "free peoples of Middle Earth" apart. Insular, self-serving, and indifferent to the needs of others, most of the kingdoms of Middle Earth have put their heads in the sand, unwilling or unable to acknowledge the growing threats and work together to form a solution. This moral failing allows Sauron to begin working toward his return. If they peoples of Middle Earth are busy being suspicious and angry at one another, how can they possibly join hands to stop Sauron?

And, tying all this together is Smaug. Voiced (and played, via motion capture) with superb skill by Benedict Cumberbatch (he's still NOT Khan), Smaug is the brilliantly realized (both in technical and in character terms) epitome of the evil of greed- scary, fearsome, and neigh unstoppable. As a greedy dragon, Smaug wants all the gold he can get (why does he want/need it? Who knows? It makes no sense, which is exactly the problem with insatiable greed), thus he has driven out the dwarves of Erebor and has stayed with his gold for decades, never leaving the Lonely Mountain. He is powerful, vicious, slightly slothful, greedy, and very condescending while being supremely intelligent. He has all this great and terrible power, but all he wants is to guard his hoard.  Smaug is the ugly side of such greed and selfishness, his flames filled with hate and jealousy at those who would wrest his wealth from him, and Thorin has similar feelings- does Thorin want Smaug out to reclaim the kingdom for his people, or does he simply want the wealth and power of Erebor for himself?

As Sauron returns, Smaug would be a natural ally, one who would burn all of civilization just for more gold, while scaring the people of Middle Earth into submission, making Sauron's job easier. Thus, greed becomes a force for even greater evil. Each of the characters is going to have to make a choice- help others or let greed and self-interest have sway. As Bilbo says at the end of the movie- "What have we done?" fits the mood and theme of the film perfectly. I commend Jackson and co for expounding on this so well- after UJ I didn't think he had it in him. Luckily, I was wrong.

There are, of course, flaws in the film that certainly keep it from LOTR status. There's a bit too much going on at times, the screen is a bit too busy for its own good- and you can't get a good fix at what's happening. There is also a lot of padding, with some bits that simply could have been cut- I'm tired of the Orcs mindlessly chasing the Dwarves for the umpteenth time. I also felt that the dwarf battle with Smaug was a bit too much, as it was apparent they couldn't win and as the "battle" went longer the energy of the scene dissipated. Finally, since the Hobbit is such a smaller book, its insane that there are 3 almost 3 hour movies to come from that one book, and you can just feel how they are adding stuff just to fill that run time. There are still issues with having too many dwarves, and there's the occasional bit that just doesn't ring true. Could Tauriel really "love" a dwarf? I'd prefer to think that she is just fascinated by this outsider, rather than "in love", which smacks of studio demographic testing.

Overall, The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug is superior in every way to its predecessor. The action, the stakes, the characterization, and most importantly, a bigger theme are all well done. IF this had been the way The Hobbit: The Unexpected Journey had been handled, this doubt about the Hobbit trilogy would never have come to pass. The quality of DOS makes UJ all the more maddening- how did they make such a poor film, and follow it up by such a strong one. The best I can say about DOS is that I left the theater happy, and I may see it in theaters again. At the very least, I will be looking forward to seeing it on DVD, and I am hopeful now about the third Hobbit movie, concluding the trilogy. If it is as good as this one, I'll be thrilled. I guess two out of three ain't bad. I give it 3 out of 4 Marks of Chaos

Until Next Time!!