The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey Review

Fashionably late, as ever, I deliver unto you, my faithful readers, my review of The Hobbit (well... the first part of a three-part adaption that integrates material from other Tolkien sources to flesh it out further).

Firstly, the film is long. It clocks in at around 3 hours. But don't worry, it will fly by. Peter Jackson's direction gives the film a good pace, with no part of the film dragging nor feeling to short. Obviously, the small fights become gigantic set-pieces for action sequences and I have to say, it's appreciated. After the Lord of the Rings trilogy, it goes without saying that we've come to expect rollicking action adventure in our fantasy films and Jackson delivers the goods with style.

Secondly, I've never read the novel, nor any of Tolkien's work, and I never felt lost or a step behind. The narrative is straightforward enough and the few references I didn't understand didn't amount to any great lose of enjoyment or fits of despair. Always a good sign, surely. At times in the film, however, I did identify that which I believe was clearly 'filler' or, to put it another way, a screenwriter's embellishment or change. This isn't to say the film was made any less enthralling, it's just that the added material was often very noticeable. Certain characters occasionally switching speech patterns, that kind of thing. Again, I haven't read the novel, so feel free to correct me.

Thirdly, the returning cast were on fine form and the new faces were welcome additions. Sir Ian McKellen slides back into the robes of Gandalf with ease, and Andy Serkis is as entertaining as ever as the twisted Gollum. Martin Freeman impressed as a young Bilbo Baggins while Richard Armitage puts in a great turn as Thorin Oakenshield. Special mention, however, has to go to what I believe to be the best piece of character-actor casting in the history of cinema: Sylvester McCoy as Radagast the Brown. I challenge anyone not to play Six Degrees of Separation with this cast...

All in all, I enjoyed this third of the tale. I still don't see this stretching into two further films as smoothly, but I'll reserve judgement for the time being.

Until Gandalf comes out of the Hobbit hole, I remain

frogoat 

Review: Amazing Spider-man

This is my late review of the new Spidey flick, The Amazing Spider-man. I'm on the fence on this one. I'm genuinely surprised by all the positive reviews, though, I have to say. I watched the film and I kept waiting for it to snatch me away on a web-line and take me on an adventure. Let's start with the good, then, shall we?

 Andrew Garfield is Peter Parker. With his gangly frame, and his delivery of snappy jokes and jabs, he was Spidey, while also demonstrating the angsty emotions and intelligence of that geek Peter I've know much of my life, Peter Parker. Emma Stone shines as a modern-day Gwen Stacy, with her awkward but somehow confident flirting with Garfield and her natural air of intellect and charm make her a worthy companion. Honestly, I felt the entire cast did an amazing job. Heck, the special effects were dang good too.

 The trouble is, the film never goes anywhere. Yes, Uncle Ben dies and Peter attempts to find the killer. Yes, Curt Conners becomes the Lizard. And yes, Captain Stacy even dies at the climax of the film. But it never felt like the elements of the story fitted together naturally. In fact, watching some of the trailers and thinking over what I saw in theaters, I'm inclined to believe several scenes were shoot and inserted late in production, while others were removed from the final product. For example, there is a subplot involving Peter looking into his parents disappearance that leads him to the Dr Conners lab. Only, he never really asks the good doctor anything about his parents, while a clip from one of the trailers depicts the Lizard taunting Peter with this information. Funny, that wasn't in the film. A lot of scenes end up feeling like this; set up, build up, and then dropped. The shadowing villain behind the Ratha fulfills his role by putting pressure on Conners to deliver a...cure, I guess, for Osborn, who we are told is dying. Ratha shows up throughout the film until the Lizard emerges and appears to be hunting him...but then we never see Ratha again. He just disappears midway through the story. I'm guessing another victim of studio meddling.

But honestly, I could have forgiven so much more because, as I said, the performances were all brilliant. I enjoyed a sort-of-homage to Sam Raimi's films with New York workers pulling strings to get Spidey to the location of his big showdown with the Lizard. I hope this review doesn't come off as overly negative, as I found a lot to enjoy in this film, with it's more serious tone and it's mechanical webshooters. I just wish there was more to like. At the end of the day, I enjoyed it enough to walk away happy that they made another Spidey flick, but also wondering how Marvel would have handled it's top hero, given the chance.

Amazing? We'll see.

Avoiding spoilers in this day and age is difficult. I won't lie, I've seen a couple of the Amazing Spider-man trailers simply by visiting the cinema, but I've purposely stayed away from anything online. Why? Because, for once, I want to see a Superhero movie without preconceived notions of what to expect. In short, I want to make up my own mind about this movie. I don't want to know in advance what type of Peter Parker and Gwen Stacy the actors will be playing. I don't. I just want to sit down with my friends and eat popcorn while watching a new Spidey flick. Is that to much to ask?

Until the internet discovers it's long lost brother, the Twilight Zone, I remain

frogoat