Click to Skip Ad
Closing in...
Love or Hate 'American Sniper,' We're Brought Together By Its Bad Fake Baby Love or Hate 'American Sniper,' We're Brought Together By Its Bad Fake Baby 'Girls' Outrage Tracker: Season 4, Episode 2, 'Triggering' 'Girls' Outrage Tracker: Season 4, Episode 2, 'Triggering' 'Better Call Saul': 'Breaking Bad' Prequel Accepts the Charges 'Better Call Saul': 'Breaking Bad' Prequel Accepts the Charges 'Girls' Outrage Tracker: Season 4, Episode 1, 'Iowa' 'Girls' Outrage Tracker: Season 4, Episode 1, 'Iowa' Why the Unanimous Praise for 'Boyhood' Is Bad for Film Criticism — and for 'Boyhood' Why the Unanimous Praise for 'Boyhood' Is Bad for Film Criticism — and for 'Boyhood' At Last, the Four-Hour Cut of 'The Hobbit' You've Been Waiting For At Last, the Four-Hour Cut of 'The Hobbit' You've Been Waiting For The A.V. Club's 25 Best Sitcom Episodes of the Past 25 Years: 'Seinfeld,' 'The Simpsons' and More The A.V. Club's 25 Best Sitcom Episodes of the Past 25 Years: 'Seinfeld,' 'The Simpsons' and More Sleeper of the Week: 'Appropriate Behavior' Sleeper of the Week: 'Appropriate Behavior' First Reviews of Johnny Depp's 'Mortdecai': Scraping Bottom With a Waxed Moustache First Reviews of Johnny Depp's 'Mortdecai': Scraping Bottom With a Waxed Moustache The Oscar Nominations Were Dramatically Lacking in Diversity, But It's Not (Just) the Academy's Fault The Oscar Nominations Were Dramatically Lacking in Diversity, But It's Not (Just) the Academy's Fault Not at Sundance? Watch 14 Festival Films Via Sundance's #ArtistServices Not at Sundance? Watch 14 Festival Films Via Sundance's #ArtistServices Daily Reads: Stop Pitting 'Broad City' Against 'Girls,' How Political Pundits Warp 'American Sniper,' and more Daily Reads: Stop Pitting 'Broad City' Against 'Girls,' How Political Pundits Warp 'American Sniper,' and more 'Strange Magic' Reviews: Yup, That's Late Period George Lucas, All Right 'Strange Magic' Reviews: Yup, That's Late Period George Lucas, All Right Daily Reads: Stop Calling Tom Hanks an Everyman, 'Blackhat' as Michael Mann's Lonely Film and More Daily Reads: Stop Calling Tom Hanks an Everyman, 'Blackhat' as Michael Mann's Lonely Film and More Criticwire Classic of the Week: Jim Jarmusch's 'Dead Man' Criticwire Classic of the Week: Jim Jarmusch's 'Dead Man' 'Disney Deaths' and 'Big Hero 6': How Children's Stories Process Loss 'Disney Deaths' and 'Big Hero 6': How Children's Stories Process Loss 'The Nightly Show With Larry Wilmore': A Ways to Go, But Its Aim Is True 'The Nightly Show With Larry Wilmore': A Ways to Go, But Its Aim Is True The Scrambled Sexuality of 'Frozen's "Let It Go" The Scrambled Sexuality of 'Frozen's "Let It Go" 'Justified' Season 6 Reviews: After a Stumble, It's Back in the Saddle 'Justified' Season 6 Reviews: After a Stumble, It's Back in the Saddle Cahiers du Cinema's Top 10 Movies of 2014: 'Goodbye to Language,' 'Under the Skin,' 'Love Is Strange' Cahiers du Cinema's Top 10 Movies of 2014: 'Goodbye to Language,' 'Under the Skin,' 'Love Is Strange'

Will Critics Regret Trashing 'The Hobbit?'

Criticwire By Matt Singer | Criticwire January 3, 2013 at 4:33PM

Is "No!" an acceptable response?
25
"The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey."
"The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey."

Well, this is certainly a unique defense of "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey." Poet and Huffington Post blogger Seth Abramson says that someday critics "will come to regret their relentless savaging of Peter Jackson's film." And why? Because, Abramson says, despite reviewers' complaints that Jackson was driven by "mercenary" impulses when dividing J.R.R. Tolkien's children's book into two, and later three, separate films, there were actually far more altruistic motivations at work:

"What these critics don't know, and what Jackson most certainly does, is the history of 'The Hobbit' as a text, and of Middle Earth as a holistic construction. While knowledge of the literature behind the film doesn't necessarily imbue the film with automatic cinematic bona fides, it does suggest that, in the long run, critics of 'The Hobbit' will be made to feel rather foolish for their circumspection and (in many instances) their open hostility toward both Jackson and his creation. If there's a reason most critics panning the film don't also encourage moviegoers to avoid it, it's likely that they sense -- as they ought to -- that future generations will view the effort considerably more kindly, and that therefore 'The Hobbit' is worth seeing now, whatever its infelicities."

Abramson then goes on to list all the various events that occur before "The Hobbit" that connect it to "The Lord of the Rings" films, and tie the two trilogies together as one enormous work of art (8 years before "The Hobbit," for example, "Aragorn is taken to Rivendell to be raised by the elves." So he's got that going for him). "It is upon this larger narrative that Jackson has undoubtedly been focused for the fifteen years he's been working on bringing Tolkien's literary vision to the silver screen," Abramson says, adding that his "knowledge of Tolkien lore can be presumed to exceed that of any small-city film critic by a factor of twenty or more, and way he shot 'The Hobbit' reveals it unambiguously."

In other words: in Jackson we trust. And, if I've got this right, it's a bit unfair to judge just one-third of "The Hobbit" on its own, because there are larger plans at work here, and ideas and themes we won't fully understand until the trilogy is complete. Fine; Jackson is a gifted filmmaker and he's earned a certain amount of respect. He definitely knows more about Tolkien than most small-city film critics -- and he certainly knows more about him than this one, since I've never read a page of the man's work. Everything I know about Middle Earth, in fact, I learned from Jackson himself. It's possible that as the first third of a massive nine hour epic, "An Unexpected Journey" will grow in stature and esteem.

It's possible -- but unlikely. And it's certain that as a single film -- which i paid nearly $20 to see -- "An Unexpected Journey" was an incomplete and not particularly satisfying unit of storytelling. You know from the outset that this is only a third of the whole saga; my gripe isn't necessarily that there's no resolution, but that so little of the film even seems to hint at an inevitable resolution. No wonder Abramson liked the movie -- Jackson was far more concerned with ticking off Middle Earth characters and subplots for the Tolkien hardcores than telling a sleek and exciting tale for average moviegoers. As a relative Middle Earth greenhorn, I marveled at the effects, pondered the HFR, and mostly didn't care a bit about any of the characters, many of whom seemed totally interchangeable. 

Plus, even as he dwells in the darkest depths of Mordor minutia, Jackson changes things. Apparently, the primary villain in "An Unexpected Journey," a vicious orc named Azog, barely appears in Tolkien's "The Hobbit." In Jackson's telling, he's introduced in flashback, battling dwarf leader Thorin Oakenshield, who beats him and leaves him for dead. Later, Azog reappears to chase Thorin, Gandalf, Bilbo, and the rest of their team as they make their way to the Lonely Mountain. In Tolkien's version, Azog actually is killed in that past battle (and not by Thorin, either). 

So what is Jackson's "The Hobbit?" Is it a transcription of a great book, or an interpretation of one artist's work by another? If it's a transcription, then it sounds like Jackson missed a few words. If it's an interpretation then it's a wildly bloated one. At least until I come to regret this post. 

Read more of "Dislike Peter Jackson's 'The Hobbit?' Then You Don't Know Tolkien."

This article is related to: The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, From the Wire


E-Mail Updates