The Perfect Start To What Will Become a Six-Part Saga

Rating: 9/10 (15 December 2012)

Through 9 long years, we have endured starts and delays time and again, waiting for that fateful return to the Middle-Earth film fans have come to know and love. The Hobbit is finally here, but it may not be the Middle-Earth some might have expected: there's less death, fewer battles, toned-down fright, and lots of comedy. Contrary to many a pretentious critic, this is not a criticism of mine. In fact, it is the absolutely perfect way to return to this beloved franchise, giving youngsters a chance to immerse themselves in this fantastical world for the first time, giving older viewers a chance to relive their favorite childhood book, and show fans what the world was like before Sauron defiled it. In short, Peter Jackson made a brilliant, and risky, move to make his latest outing to Middle-Earth smaller and more reserved.
As always, the cinematography is absolutely beautiful. Brown grasslands shine with a golden radiance and the light hits just the right angle every time. It's a completely stunning spectacle and camera buffs should see it just for this aspect alone.
The acting is solid across the board. Ian McKellen is Gandalf, there's no question of it. Andy Serkis, in the short time he appears, does his best Gollum yet. Richard Armitage makes a welcome, if a little generic, debut to Middle-Earth as Thorin. The actor who takes the cake, though, is the leader himself, Martin Freeman. Freeman not only fits Ian Holmes's mannerisms and quirks like a glove, but he completely steals every scene he is in. Freeman's comedic timing is dead-on, almost evoking Cary Grant at times, and his emotional scenes prove to be completely convincing. It will not take long for him to reach superstar status.
Now, before I continue to indulge, I have to address some of the flaws, which are relatively minor, but still quite noteworthy. One of the primary reasons Jackson cited for making The Hobbit into a trilogy was to allow content from the Appendices to be shown, but scenes pertaining to this particular storyline felt fleeting and tacked on as an afterthought, only taking up perhaps 20 minutes of the total film. Hopefully, the inevitable Extended Edition will address this (this seems very likely, as trailers, even ones shown after the announcement of the entire trilogy, seemed to show Gandalf in Dol Guldor and battling Thrain, neither of which were included in this theatrical cut; we also see Bilbo viewing the Sword of the King in the first trailer, but that was also seemingly cut).
While on the topic of this side story, I want to address Sylvester McCoy as Radagast the Brown. Some critics have labeled him the Jar Jar Binks of the Middle-Earth series. I want to counter by saying he is everything Jar Jar should have been: very over-the-top comic relief that stays long enough to serve his purpose in the story then get out of the way before becoming a tiresome annoyance. Even his brief appearance would have been off-putting for me had it not been implied in the books that his mannerisms are similar to that portrayed in the film, so I was able to just enjoy a performance that helps color the overall brighter tone of the movie.
Another problem I had was, like many, the CGI orcs. While the orcs from LOTR seemed intimidating and haunting in their unnerving resemblance to humans (humans warped and twisted by ancient evil), the CGI orcs in this movie have lost these attributes. Azog in particular looks and feels very generic and dull, like your typical first-level boss in a sub-standard video game. After giving it some thought, however, I can see why such a decision was made: like I said before, this is more aimed at entire families rather than just ages 13 and up. The movie's lighter tone could have been compromised by some of the most gruesome-looking monstrosities in recent cinematic memory. And given how a lighter tone was the absolute best way to go with this film, I suppose CGI orcs can be considered the lesser of two evils. I don't think, however, toned-down CGI orcs will be as much of a concern in the later two installments. I believe it is safe to assume the trilogy will progressively darken (though hopefully not too much) to eventually match the tone of LOTR, so the orcs are likely to follow suit, especially if early pictures of Azog's son Bolg (who did not appear in this movie) is anything to go by.
If anything, The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey manages to actually improve the original trilogy of films. We see a more innocent Middle-Earth, making Sauron's later crimes even worse than they already are. We begin at the halls of an ancient dwarven city being terrorized and conquered by a dragon, before being swept into a world of imagination and wonder, a world shaped by the enchanting and wonderful, before these traits are defiled and ruined by the threat of war and death. This is how future generations will view the Middle-Earth saga: an epic children's fantasy story that slowly ages into an adult-oriented parable about the realities of war, sacrifice and endurance. Because of this, and because I know I'm going out on a pretty thin limb here, I believe it is very possible that Peter Jackson's Middle-Earth series could go down as the greatest film saga in cinematic history, outperforming the likes of The Godfather (the third, and final, film failed) and Star Wars (Return of the Jedi and the prequels flopped). I doubt many, especially for more casual critics and audiences who were expecting the same emotional impact The Return of the King delivered, can realize this at the present time, but when the other two Hobbit films are released and Peter Jackson's six-part Story of Middle-Earth is complete, I believe it just might go down in history as the first (if only) six-part masterpiece.