O Hobbit: Uma Jornada Inesperada

Firstly, I have to make a statement- the LOTR movies, for me, have set an impossibly high bar both in this universe and within the movie world as a whole. Their cinematic beauty and value cannot be denied.

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, however, is an entirely different movie. Sure, it's set in the world of Middle Earth, but that's really about all it holds in common with the aforementioned trilogy, alongside a few familiar faces. Many members of the audience I was in complained that the movie took a long time to get going, but it actually was paced rather well, with a suitably sized introduction with Ian Holm and Elijah Wood making way for the current storyline. The first thing you notice as a viewer is that this movie is notably funnier. Whilst the LOTR trilogy had it's lighter moments, The Hobbit revels in the lighter side of life, with lots of genuinely hilarious moments interspersing themselves with scenes of real peril.The visually stunning moments are still there, and whilst I saw this movie in 2D, some moments would have been absolutely perfect in 3D. At first, it's a little difficult to get into, especially when the light-hearted opening with the countless visiting dwarfs gets underway. However, if you can remind yourself as a viewer that The Hobbit was a book written for a much younger, impressionable audience, then you'll likely have a good time watching this. That said, it is far from childish, and although it is a lighter, more fun affair, there are still many parts within the story that an adult audience can relate to.

Martin Freeman has been a firm favourite of mine since his humble beginnings on British terrestrial television, and seeing him here on the big screen is both a welcome and bizarre experience. That said, his demeanour and technique are perfect for the role of Bilbo Baggins, as he exudes the homely, simple manner of a Hobbit very effectively. Ian McKellen is perfect as everyone's favourite wizard, and Richard Armitage (another former British television star playing his trade to the silver screen)is a brilliant Thorin (son of Thrain!), mixing a toughened heart with a tortured soul. If anything, Thorin may turn out to be the true hero of the piece. The rest of the dwarfs are also brilliant, and many of them are the highlights of the movie.

The special effects are once again spectacular, with the eye wateringly stunning rock giant battle a particularly memorable moment. The makeup effects are up to the job, too, and the attention to detail is ridiculous, right down to the individual scratches and weathered look of the weapons the characters wield. If you enjoyed the LOTR trilogy, then Peter Jackson will have you in awe again, although The Hobbit trilogy looks set to be a much more relaxed and 'fun' adventure. At the end of the day, the only complain to be made about the movie is that it simply isn't LOTR. Those movies set such a high level that even Peter Jackson himself can't seem to top them with this effort, but that's a minor complain for what is otherwise I very well made movie.

Cinematic, adventurous, enjoyable and epic- The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey knows its audience and caters to them very well indeed.

I never came around to read the LotR books before watching the movies and I actually haven't done that until now (so maybe shame on me), but I did read 30-40 pages of the Hobbit. And it seems, like almost everyone of those pages turns out to be in the movie. It's a big scene and it feels like Peter Jackson put almost everything in it. He apparently also put other Tolkien related stuff in it.

Which he must have done, because how could you make 3 movies/parts out of one book? That is smaller in size than the original Rings trilogy that is. But what about the movie? It feels fun and it looks good (once you get used to the HD framing, which makes a few props look very plastic). Also the very HD 3D (or should I say the extra FPS) we got served made the movie feel like it was on fast forward. I think your eyes have to get used to that (in comparison to normal frames per Second that every other movie uses).

Apart from the technical point of view, this is a well made movie, but it never completely touched me. It is well played and it has the beginning of a great adventure, but it feels a bit over bloated. I will obviously watch the other parts too and I'm pretty sure they will up the ante

Edit: rewatching it a decade later, I realize I may have been a bit too harsh on the rating. I guess I do that with big budget movies. I can attest that I reckon I got used to the Higher Frame Rate the movie uses. Not that many movies have adapted that style (I reckon Avatar 2 will), but it is what it is. Technically you can fault the movie and the extended version was quite nice to see (so I guess it wasn't a literal rewatch - no pun intended).

Let me start by saying that i have never watched any of the Lord of The Rings movies before.I was told to start with the hobbit. I was amazed at how cool this franchise must be as i loved every minute of it.I kinda feel ashamed for not giving this series a try earlier. 8/10 from me ,yeah that good.

I Remember the first time i watched this movie in the cinema and i did not like it as much i thought i would! Maybe it was because my hopes were very high after LOTR and while this movie gad elements from that, it didn't reach the same level in terms of story and visuals!

Jacksons overuse of CGI sometimes pull me out of it, but its not as bad as the third movie, which almost gives me headaches!

But over the time i have learned to like the movie and look past its flaws! Compared to the first season of Rings of Power this movie is deffinetely not bad, and does a better job of conveying a story with characters you care about! When it comes to the source material this movie doesn't drag as much as the others! The scenes with gollum are "hands down" the best part of the movie!

Overall a great fantasy experience that still excists in the shadow of its predecacors but entertains none the less!

When I heard that there was to be a film version of The Hobbit, I was quite looking forward to it as the big finish of Lord of the Rings was still in my mind and, unlike LotR, I had actually read The Hobbit several times many years ago. When I heard that it might be two films I wasn't surprised but the news that it was to be three did rather dampen my spirits as I don't know if I had the interest for this story to be concluded as 2016 rolls into town. Regardless I did of course watch the film because it is still a large blockbuster and, at a time of the year normally filled with overly earnest Oscar contenders, I did quite like the idea of returning to this world again.

With this in mind I did wonder why I watched it with a surprisingly detached air and why I wasn't able to get into it like I should have done. I had some reservations with the first film in the LotR trilogy but this seemed different because it certainly wasn't a lack of action and forward motion that gave me a problem here. Quite the opposite actually because, once the first 45 minutes or so are out of the way then the action set-pieces come thick and fast and noisy. The opening hints at the power of the dragon to come before settling down for a gentle reintroduction to the Shire and then the characters we will follow; this section I found a little longer than it should have been and I could have done with a bit less noisy banter from the Dwarfs, since the film would provide much more from them. The majority of the film is the journey (or at least that bit of it that this film covers) and it produces plenty of action with great special effects really well integrated into the live action. So visually and technically there is plenty here. Problem is that little of it felt urgent or tense and actually the delivery of the constant action does rather detract from it.

With Fellowship of the Ring, the group was smaller and the development of the plot better; additionally the action was more scaled down and comparatively simple. Here we have set-pieces where it feels like everything has been thrown at the screen and every inch of every frame has been filled with movement wherever possible. This tended to overwhelm me rather than draw me in though and in effect the noise prevented me really getting into it. Likewise by the time I had seen the characters survive impossible situations and defy gravity for the third or fourth time, the film sort of lost the ability to make me believe there was danger involved – which is a problem given I was already being pushed away by how busy and noisy it all was. Tellingly the scene that worked the best for me was with Gollum; this scene had tension, had uncertainity, had threat and did it all with small movements and dialogue; also worth noting that while Gollum is of course another special effect, you don't notice it in that scene because you are focused on the content instead of the visual.

The cast sort of fit into this approach as well. While everyone is fine and does as required, at times they do tend to become part of the noise and effects rather than being characters. Freeman is a good Bilbo and his mannerisms work well (which helps negate his limited range) while of course McKellen is always welcome. The dwarfs didn't make much of an impression on me though, even if they all looked the part and delivered a few laughs. The rest of the cast are all fine but to be honest the effects are the main stars here and technically it is very impressive even if it is a bit overdone at times.

I didn't dislike The Hobbit but at the same time I was disappointed in it. The action is noisy and busy but there isn't enough to draw me into the story or to make the action thrill me so much as it did overwhelm me. Hopefully the second film will see the characters and plots grow me on so that I am more emotionally bought into the films, but for this first one I must confess to being surprised by how much the film seemed content to have me watch from a distance rather than draw me in and engage me.