Has bad points, but comes out good nevertheless

Rating: 7/10 (14 June 2015)

Rating-7/10
We have returned to Middle-earth in film again and brought along with it hobbit's, dwarfs and of course Gandalf the Grey. This isn't so much a triumphant return as maybe I or others wanted but I found nevertheless this to be good fun and the start to an adventure that looks like it could be also good fun. It has it's bad points, it even has bad points in parts the producers think are good, but lets not get into that just yet.
Martin Freeman plays our small hero Bilbo Baggins and he has an air of awkward always surrounding him, I didn't like him too much in the role but he matches it well enough. With so many of the dwarfs it is hard to pick one of them who stands out, Richard Armitage as Thorin Oakenshield is like Freeman OK but doesn't step up his performance from others, the powerful character becomes hard to control. Ian McKellen reprising his role as Gandalf the wizard is good too, no one stands out in the entire film in truth, but none are really bad though.
Peter Jackson takes the helm and takes it firmly, he churns out a pretty good movie, one that he can be proud of(but almost too close to failing to be that proud). Jackson is joined by Guillermo Del Toro and others in adapting this and they do a fine job, many films fail to shake off the book but I feel this is one that can be remembered slightly without thinking the book is always better. Jackson manages to bring the actors close, creates a sense of brotherhood and ignites old rivalries we thought maybe ended in the Lord of the Rings film series, good to see that.
Now coming on swiftly into the technical section of the movie, and precisely the special effects, they are very over used. This movie seems to rely solely on green screen type tactics to make us think we are seeing whatever is supposed to be there, problem is it is in so much abundance, it becomes almost like effects sickness. Now they aren't bad, and by no stretch are they not well made(this is top quality), the only problem is they are used way too much and the film could have benefited from more real sets if truth be told.
This certainly isn't a new kind of film, sure we have never seen the book adapted in such massive big screen presence, but this doesn't come off as slick or smart like the Lord of the Rings movies do. I think the movie is a very sweet kind of nice movie, sure it has it's dark parts but mostly it is very fun like, a fantasy quest, not an action filled with blood and guts. It certainly suffers from it's length as well, at near three hours long this makes it shorter than the Lord of the Rings but still too long, I find it may have been hard for Jackson to find a point on which to end.
So overall if you are going to watch a movie that includes fantasy, adventure, action and the like, well this may be for you, but maybe not also. I would't recommend this too all as it can at times as mentioned feel too "nice", not enough darkness maybe for some and it does suffer from a slight lack of epic-ness in scale. This is of course part of a Trilogy so don't ever expect the first film in that to be that best, this actually could be though so if your going to watch them all don't miss this one out, it's mighty important not only in the Hobbit, but also for the Lord of the Rings.