At long last, I finally got my chance to watch the extended edition of The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug. Having discussed the picture with some Facebook friends, I thought I’d write down a few spoilerless thoughts. If you’ve seen it, too, I’d love to know what you thought.
First things first. The Hobbit trilogy is not, I repeat not, a dramatisation of the kids book. I said a few things about this in an earlier post. In fact, I said a few things about the extended edition of the first movie, An Unexpected Journey. In the Hobbit trilogy I think Peter Jackson is trying to show the history of the One Ring from the time it was found in the Goblin tunnels leading up to the events in LOTR. He uses a great deal of material chronicled by Tolkien in the appendices to LOTR, which explains why Gandalf disappeared, leaving the dwarves to face Mirkwood alone. Even in the children’s book, allusions were made to greater things on the move.
I’ve always felt, from the first time I read it, that the book The Hobbit has two parts. Up until the moment the dwarves reach the doorstep, it’s a kids book and written in that way, skating over the violence and using language like ‘poor little hobbit’. But after that the story becomes much darker, leading into the Battle of Five Armies. It’s as if Tolkien forgot who his audience was. And the next movie, the Battle of Five Armies, is that final chapter.
I also appreciate that a book cannot always be translated into a film because film is shorter, visual and needs to be fast moving. So I understand (to an extent) Jackson’s decisions in adding characters and situations. Azog the white Orc is a case in point. According to Tolkien, he died in the battle at the gates of Moria. Using that same logic – what moves the film forward – Jackson introduced Tauriel, the female elf captain. Like many, I could have done without the ‘romance’ factor between her and Kili. However, I like the fact that Jackson has shown the woodelves as much more than Tolkien’s depiction of them in the Hobbit the book. I also like that Legolas is in it, because it shows how he changes from his father’s isolationist stance to seeing that everything in the world is interconnected, thus lending depth to his appearance as a member of the nine companions in LOTR. I also like the way he shows the One Ring working its evil, both on Bilbo and the wider world
Back to the extended version. To me, the film is more complete. Parts of the story which were over in a flash in the original film, such as the journey through Mirkwood, are expanded, and if you know the book well, you’ll recognise the scenes. Of course, there are a few short edits which have been recovered, such as a little more of Steven Fry as the Master. But the big – huge- gain for me was the additional detail of the bigger picture, the lead-in to the next book, and ultimately LOTR. There were scenes which I had expected to see in the original movie, and did not. With those scenes added back, I believe the film is more true to Tolkien’s vision.
I’m not a movie fan, but I have to tell you, I’m hangin’ out for the Battle of Five Armies. Bring it on!
Oooh, so the extended version has more story? That’s terrific news. I am easy going with film adaptions of books although I missed Peeves in the Harry Potter movies. Heh, I got over it.
I’m a movie maniac. I love them and now you’ve made me dying to get the extended versions of all the Hobbit movies and watch them all in a row.
I can’t stress enough how much more the extended version conveyed. To be honest, I felt a bit cheated on the original.