A return to Middle Earth form with The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey [spoiler free]

Last week, I went to see The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey twice in three days (2D & 3D). I was interested to see if there would be any cinematic continuity, for example would it still feel like a Lord of the Rings franchise film? Would there be an obvious link, or could I see it becoming another version of the Star Wars prequel debacle? And not to mention that I've missed the glory days Peter Jackson's version of Middle Earth! Will the first Hobbit instalment be swiping all the Academy Awards like its predecessors?

My first screening was in 2D on opening day, and it blew me away. Or, more specifically, back to 2004 where The Return of the King left off. Watching The Hobbit in 2D is most definitely the best way to go if you're nostalgic for The Lord of the Rings, and want the same experience. This was exactly what I wanted. I left the cinema in a daze, feeling as though I had been brought back to a time which I've always craved to visit again. It was magnificent, and I didn't want to leave.

Some familiar characters return, for example Frodo (Elijah Wood) and an older Bilbo (Ian Holm), and there's Gandalf (Ian McKellen) and Elrond (Hugo Weaving). We even see familiar places: Weathertop, Rivendell, and the Shire are just some. The new faces are also delightful; the dwarves are very well-interpreted, and I loved the unscheduled appearance by Radagast the Brown (a previously unseen Tolkien creation played excellently by Sylvester McCoy).

My only casting complaint is that of Martin Freeman, who plays the younger Bilbo. Though he can pull off the lighter, whimsical side of Bilbo's personality, I wasn't convinced by his portrayal of more serious moments. Maybe Freeman will grow on me.

And then there's 3D, which provides a completely different viewing experience. For a start, Jackson decided that he would film The Hobbit at a frame rate of 48 frames-per-second, instead of the more conventional 24fps. What this means is that because more detail is captured on film, what you see on screen is super-HD quality: you can spot every vain, every spark. You can even decipher each dwarf's face during a chaotic fight scene.

However, while this was impressive, I didn't appreciate it. I found it, at times, gimmicky and distracting. Sometimes I even felt like I was watching a video game (a common complaint, it seems, made by viewers). I certainly didn't feel as awe-struck and nostalgic as I did the first time around. Of course, opinions will be different for each individual. But as I'm a person who wears glasses already, I find it annoying having to put another pair on top of those I'm already wearing! Perhaps that's something I should've taken into account before choosing 3D. Also, I wonder if this seemingly controversial mode of high frame-rate shooting will hinder The Hobbit's chances of full Oscar glory? We'll have to see this awards season.

Otherwise, I loved this first instalment. It steers away from Tolkien's original novel at times, as film adaptations generally do, but I found myself rather accepting of this. The screenwriters have done such a good job and it's obvious that they put in a lot of heart, respect, and research into their reworkings.

Also, if you haven't done so in a while, I'd highly recommend watching The Fellowship of the Ring before going to see The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey – there are some charming little nods between the two which are too good to pass by.

Welcome back, Middle Earth!

Have you seen The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey? What did you think?

It's official! Peter Jackson confirms The Hobbit films will be a trilogy!

Though the on-screen adaptation of J.R.R. Tolkien's masterpiece The Hobbit was originally shot as two films, director Peter Jackson confirmed today that he will turn the double epic into a trilogy.

He writes:

We know how much of the story of Bilbo Baggins, the Wizard Gandalf, the Dwarves of Erebor, the rise of the Necromancer, and the Battle of Dol Guldur will remain untold if we do not take this chance. The richness of the story of The Hobbit, as well as some of the related material in the appendices of The Lord of the Rings, allows us to tell the full story of the adventures of Bilbo Baggins and the part he played in the sometimes dangerous, but at all times exciting, history of Middle-earth.

So, without further ado and on behalf of New Line Cinema, Warner Bros. Pictures, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Wingnut Films, and the entire cast and crew of The Hobbit films, I’d like to announce that two films will become three.

It has been an unexpected journey indeed, and in the words of Professor Tolkien himself, 'a tale that grew in the telling.' 

You can read the entire message on his Facebook page.

Jackson is on record saying that although every major scene from the book has already been shot (shooting wrapped a couple of months ago), he's been interested in adding scenes that would depict additional notes on Middle Earth, written by Tolkien, at the end of the third Lord of the Rings volume, The Return of the King.

So, at least some of the actors will have to come back and shoot extra scenes to cater the third instalment.

From Entertainment Weekly:

As for where that material might come from, Jackson and his co-writers, Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens, are already drawing on sources beyond The Hobbit book itself — in particular, some 125 pages of additional notes Tolkien wrote at the end of Return of the King that expanded the world of The Hobbit, which Jackson has the rights to use. As Tolkien purists know, they’ve also taken a few extra liberties, inventing a couple of totally new characters, like Evangeline Lilly’s Elf warrior Tauriel. But Jackson has not yet revealed — and is perhaps still trying to work out — exactly what shape the story would take if, in fact, The Hobbit became a trilogy. 

What do you think? Are you excited about this news, or are you concerned that the films are going to take a few more liberties than are necessary? It does make a person wonder how much footage they actually shot. The Lord of the Rings trilogy was obviously three films because of the three volumes Tolkien wrote, but The Hobbit is just one book (and is much shorter than any of the three LOTR volumes at that). Perhaps, this way, The Hobbit films will be more true to the detail of the book?

Well, we can only wait and see.

The first instalment of The Hobbit, An Unexpected Journey, is scheduled to be released worldwide on December 14th, followed by the second, There and Back Again, next Christmas. The third release is being aimed for the summer of 2014.

Watch the trailer for The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey!

The first trailer for The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is finally here! How exciting is this?! Oh, if only I had a time machine – I could go and watch this film now! I can't wait to see it in all its Middle Earth glory!




What do you think? Are you squeeing with anticipation like me?! I don't think I've ever been this excited about a film before!

Also remember to check out the newly launched official website – you can download the trailer and some fabulous desktop wallpaper.

Later, Hobbitses!

Books vs. TV & Film adaptations

I don't know about you guys, but I have a love-hate relationship with films and TV shows adapted from books. There's usually something that offends me about the way the story has been translated, whether I've seen the film first or vice versa. Although, this seems to happen to me more with feature-length films than television series's, as I guess the former have a lot less time fit the detail in. But there are times where I just feel they've made a few too many changes. Not all the time, as you shall see, but it's always something that's in the back of my mind.

Here are a few of the adaptations I've seen:

1. The Twilight Saga (The Twilight saga by Stephenie Meyer)

I watched Twilight before reading any of the books, initially falling victim to the hype and renting it out on DVD. I wasn't sure if I liked it that much, but went on to read the first installment and absolutely fell in love with it. Aside from preferring New Moon in movie form (not enough Edward in the book), I am more of a fan of the written. Eclipse is by far my favourite of the novels but my least favourite of the films, so needless to say I was pretty dissapointed about that one in particular. But I can't wait for Breaking Dawn Parts 1 & 2 to come out (so curious to see how they handle the whole Renesmee situation!)

2. Confessions Of A Shopaholic (The Shopaholic Series by Sophie Kinsella)

Having loved Sophie Kinsella's Shopaholic books, I couldn't wait to see Becky on the big screen. But here's another film that fell short of my expectations! I can't understand why they had to change so much of it. Firstly, why is Becky American? I'm sure London is interesting enough. Plus what did they do with Suze? She's completely different in the book! If I was in charge of casting, I would've no way picked Krysten Ritter to play her. So wrong. And Derek Smeath did not need to be that evil because he certainly wasn't in the book. I understand they have to change certain things for more 'cinematic effect', but was this really necessary?

3. Pride and Prejudice – 1995 BBC adaptation (Pride And Prejudice by Jane Austen)

This is my absolute favourite adaptation! I don't know if it's because my first experience reading Pride and Prejudice went alongside watching the BBC series as a study aid in school, but I think it captures the magic of the book with incredible precision. Sure there are a few scenes which have been taken out, altered or added in (most notably that famous wet t-shirt scene), but it's done so well. I just love everything - the casting, the locations, the costume, etc. Anyway, you get the point! ;-)

4. Marley And Me (Marley And Me by John Grogan)

I read the book a while ago and so can't remember all the particulars, but I do recall thinking that aside from leaving out a few scenes and altering others, the film pretty much stays true to John Grogan's memoir. I really like both versions, though I can't watch the film too often because the ending makes me bawl my eyes out! It's seriously one of the most touching films I've seen. They did well with this one.

5. The Hobbit (The Hobbit by J.R.R. Tolkien)

Fear not; my time machine is still in the shop! But this adaptation I can't help but speculate about because I'm so. darn. excited! I loved The Lord of the Rings film trilogy, and loved reading The Hobbit so I'm very curious about how this will turn out. I do have my concerns though – I've heard that Cate Blanchett will be back as Galadriel and Orlando Bloom as Legolas, but their characters aren't in the book. I'll just trust Peter Jackson for now, though. I really must read The Lord of the Rings books to get some more perspective between now and next Christmas!





Of course, there are loads of famous adaptations that I've left out, like Harry Potter (haven't read the books or seen the films recently), Bridget Jones (haven't read the books yet), Game Of Thrones, Mildred Piece, Revolutionary Road, and so forth.

So let me ask you guys, what are some of your favourite and least favourite adaptations? Do you tend to reach for the film after you've read the book, or do you avoid them at all costs in case they ruin the story for you? I'm all ears!

Review: The Hobbit by J.R.R. Tolkien

Poor Bilbo Baggins! An unassuming and rather plump hobbit (as most of these small, furry-footed people tend to be ), Baggins finds himself unwittingly drawn into adventure by a wizard named Gandalf and 13 dwarves bound for the Lonely Mountain, where a dragon named Smaug hordes a stolen treasure. Before he knows what is happening, Baggins finds himself on the road to danger. (via amazon.co.uk)

I am so glad to have finally read this book! I've been a fan of The Lord Of The Rings film trilogy for years, and so have been meaning to get around to reading the original works by Tolkien himself. I have to admit though that it was all this talk about the upcoming film adaptation of The Hobbit which gave me the drive to pick up the book itself (these days I'm trying to be good and read the books before I watch the films). Now I can sit back and watch the development of Peter Jackson's latest quest with safe insight into what's coming up!

In terms of the book itself, I was not dissapointed. You really get the feeling that you are an extra member of the excursion to the lonely mountain, following the courageous and intelligent hobbit Bilbo Baggins, the dwarves and the wizard Gandalf on their quest to reclaim the Lonely Mountain treasures from the evil dragon Smaug. All the changing surroundings and eclectic characters are described beautifully, and while this is a somewhat long and perilous adventure, there is no shortage of magic, cheer or even of song.

Tolkien originally wrote The Hobbit for his children, so if you have kids of your own who enjoy stories of enchantment then it's likely that they'll love this. Of course, the appeal doesn't stop there - there is enough in this book to appeal to many adults. This is also the prelude to The Lord Of The Rings series (though you do not need to read one to enjoy the other), and from what I understand they are more orientated towards an older audience.

Personally, I can't wait to read the rest of Mr Tolkien's books!