Konrad's thought-provoking theori...obbit (future spoilers included)!
Okay, I saw the Hobbit last night, and REALLY liked it...
So here is my theory, Jackson wanted to produce with Del Toro directing, but it mysteriously didn't work out. We heard all kinds of excuses, but I remain convinced that Jackson was not thrilled with Del Toro's vision. Del Toro is an incredibly talented director, but his fantasy tends to be more Continental European than British--as evidenced by Pan's Labyrinth--and he is also into the more American roller-coaster type of scenes (think Hellboy), etc.
Just between me and you, I would figure the dragon to be the deal breaker--the earliest drawings of the dragon under Del Toro were decidedly NOT Tolkienesque (think British meat and potatoes fantasy and you'll know what I mean), and soon after Jackson suddenly stepped in to direct, with Del Toro citing overcommittment to other movies. This excuse was pitifully weak (in reallity, backing out of such a deal would have resulted in a flurry of lawsuits or potential lawsuits), so I figure that for one reason or the other it went the other way.
The result was a movie with the script written, most likely much of the story-board work done and design for scenes well under way. This would include set building and design, art work for special effects, etc. As a sudden dramatic change in plans would result in a massive budget overrun and perhaps layoffs (and as the last thing Jackson needed were more union troubles), Jackson was left with huge chunks of the movie to put together or somehow bend to his vision.
Most likely the roller coaster action scenes were already finished, which meant that suddenly Jackson had something monstrously unwieldy that really did not fit the book.
This is not to put the blame solely on Del Toro--Jackson likely told him he had a free hand when he actually didn't--which led to a rather schizophrenic situation that resulted in not only a bolted together movie, but a sudden announcement that the movie would be in three parts and not two, as was Jackson's original plan.
Why do I say this? Certain scenes (the Brown Wizard's, for example, look quite Del Toroesque, as does the long, spiraling and, for me, tiresome scene with the goblins and the Goblin king). Other parts of the movie, the singing dwarves, the over-sentimentallism with Bilbo saying something sweet and Gandalf giving us his relieved, overly-loving Grandpa look, are definitely Jackson. And actually you could go one way or the other, but the awkward combination of both (not to mention the long, rehashed sections with younger (but older looking) characters from the LOTR are what you typically find in both patched together novels and films.
In short, there was too much emphasis on mindless action scenes, now we have some explaining to do...
Then there are other likely gaffes. The orcs are all super orcs, not to mention the pale king orc--and these orcs would kick the living crap out of the uruk hai of the LOTR when plainly that would never have been either Tolkien's vision (or I suspect, Jackson's). Additionally, the Brown Wizard may have fast rabbits, but he certainly had to cover a massive amount of ground to jet from Mirkwood to Bilbo's party in what appeared to be one afternoon.
This also makes no sense--and it smacks of repair work or even worse: gargantuan undertaking to rescue what Jackson rightly or wrongly believed to be a developing mess.
Would it have worked out under Del Toro? Maybe. Probably even. Would it have worked out solely under Jackson. The record with LOTR stands for itself. But as they say, too many cooks spoil the stew, and this stew looks like it was a bit ripe with far too many ideas from at least one too many sides...
I still liked it though.
(THIS REVIEW, WHICH IS BASED PURELY ON CONJECTURE, UNCHECKED FACTS AND WHAT COULD BE TERMED AS KONRAD STRING THEORY, IS AVAILABLE FOR YOUR ENJOYMENT AND FRUSTRATION ONLY. NO PERSONS, PLACES OR IDEAS HAVE BEEN INTERVIEWED, VISITED OR EVEN PROPERLY THOUGHT OUT.)
I forgot the spoiler-- i think Viggo could return in the next film as Bard. I'll explain later!
If there is a sequel, I will not be in the theater to watch it. I'm just not into that type of fantasy.
I felt the same way about the Harry Potter series. I saw the first couple of movies and left the theater feeling... meh. I've not seen the others nor do I care to.
All three films are already filmed, Luke Evans = Bard.
Ok. One minor theory blown, but hey, the rest could be true!
Great theory Konrad.
I have one theory on why they made it 3 parts...
You can make more money when you get the consumers to go to the theatre 3 times instead of only twice to watch a movie that they already know the ending to.
Oh Hermitt. [Sigh] Always down on capitalism...
I saw it somewhat begrudgingly but was very pleasantly surprised. I ended up really enjoying it. But I have no idea how they're gonna drag two more movies out of it. From my recollection (admittedly decades old), all that's left is to defeat the dragon and fight over the treasure. How is that 6 hours?
P.S. Can there be a less effective fighting force than the mountain golbins? They're like the Iraqi Republican Guard of middle earth.
Oh Hermitt. [Sigh] Always down on capitalism...
It's ok, it was just a theory.
I was sort of bummed. It was visually spectacular, but I felt like they were really padding it with both Indiana Jones type action scenes and Jackson heavy handed emotive slow motion camera holds. He's become the film making version of JK Rowling - he'd be a great storyteller if he was forced to edit!
They still have to get captured by the spiders and hang out with the wood elves. I've read that he's pulling in back story from other Tolkien writings to give more context about the history of Middle Earth and the relationships between the races, much like the long digression about how Smaug captured the Lonely Mountain and sent the Dwarves into exile, leading to a rift between the Dwarves and Elves. It seemed really forced to me that the writers were trying to reference the three LOTR movies as much as possible so that you REALLY knew it was a prequel! I'll probably see the other two, but I won't be chomping at the bit the way I was for the LOTR movies.
I just saw this movie and wondered as well, why did del Toro suddenly opt out of The Hobbit a couple years back? The movie itself had too long of scenes, several, including the beginning "dwarfs at Bilbo's house" way too loooooong scene. I need to see this movie again, because as it stews, I dislike it more. The "rock giants" made us laugh out loud.
- No dwarfs were harmed during the filming of this movie.*
Addendum: Compare man to bugs, we are still very fast-moving creatures. Therefore, why do all directors make "all" huge creatures incredibly slow during action scenes? See rock giants, creatures in the upcoming "Pacific Rim" movie, giant Sand-Man vs. Spider-Man, and the list goes on and on. Big land creatures don't suddenly move as slow as whales in the water! Directors, oh they make me crazy...I should have been one! Now that I think of it, I think I will!