Disappointingly less than the sum of its parts...

Rating: 4/10 (13 June 2015)

There are so many things to love about this movie...and yet i feel so very disappointed having sat and watched it.
Let's pick out a few good points:
The source material can not really be faulted, although I will admit it's been a long while since I read the book so maybe there are some trifling errors, omissions or holes that I fail to remember. The cast is great, both by name and ability, and more importantly the acting is good (but only when seen in context). The scenery is spectacular, as are the more obviously visual effects. The sound is effective, and the soundtrack combines well with the visuals.
But still, to me at least, its far from a classic.
For starters the introduction is far, far too long. I had watched 50 minutes yet felt like it had 15 minutes of relevant story, and sadly the slow pace and insistence on using filler scenes had only just began.
Many scenes seem to exist solely to stretch out the story and justify the dubious decision to split the book in to not just 2 but 3 films - all from a book of 300 pages (Penguins re-release is 320 but that includes numerous extras to support the actual novel).
So where did Peter Jackson get all those extra screen minutes?...I believe it's not only the method of writing whole scenes based on mere snippets of book lines, but also the over insistence on slow panning shots of landscapes intermixed with slow motion battle scenes, that overlong introduction...it all adds up. The result is 3 movies from a book which when stood alongside The Lord Of The Rings actually comes out shorter than any of the 3 novellas that make up the LOTR tome.
I've already said the film looks great...and it also looks very,very fake! This may be a fantasy land with fantastical peoples and beasts but even the live action segments appear airbrushed to within an inch of a cartoon adventure. There really is a point where worse is better because realism can help you feel immersed in the action. Sadly I wasn't and couldn't help but feel distant from the characters. In LOTR the CGI added the depth , here too often it distracts.
Because is looks so perfect it makes a big impact on the dramatic tension. You begin to feel that characters will prevail in their action and return home unharmed before the movie even gets up to steam. Every time you see someone in peril you don't want to jump in and help them, or sit back and watch how they overcome, instead you just sit and wait. So in a film that is far too long you now have a lack of true drama.
But what of the characters? For a start so many are completely redundant. Right from the get go (I would say beginning but it was probably a fair while afterwards considering the slow pace) I couldn't get attached to any of the dwarfs because there were simply too many to count. This wasn't a party it was a small army, and one consisting of too many nobodies amongst their number.
What characters did actually have enough screen time were played admirably by the cast (although I still hate Gollum who has never come across as having a real identity even taking in to account his being twisted by his 'Precious'). If anything the cast is wasted because too many of the scenes are dominated by the sweeping scenery and slow pacing - the Elves have always been a thoughtful race but here they come across as merely slow.
But its not just the Elves and Dwarfs that disappoint. Here you have Wizards who do little Wizardry, Orcs and Trolls who look and sound like comedic characters as opposed to life threatening monsters. I think I saw a couple of Mountain Giants throwing rocks at each other and endangering the party passing unseen below...I say I think because it was a few minutes of grey boring screen time and I may have dreamt it...and a Dragon who apparently could only turn up for filming the beginning and end despite supposedly being the centre of the story!
Like many I loved the book and felt this film had real potential, and yet I also feel like it has been wasted. Whos fault is it...Jackson? The studio? Tolkein? Who ever it may be it is simply too long, too slow, too full of nothing moments.
I've heard it said that no movies should ever be longer than 120 minutes otherwise it risks becoming a bore...and if it cant be compressed then best split than shorten too far. Maybe it could be argued that to display the depth of a whole world was beyond the scope of a mere 2hrs in which case could not it fit in to 4?...instead we get 169 minutes (or 182 in the extended cut) and a further 161 & 144 minutes to come. If you have this much time on your hands please just read the book! ... I knew it was long, I knew it was slow, but I also knew its beautifully shot. What I didn't expect was it to be less than enthralling.
....
I expected an 8...I gave it a 4!