Breaking the Hobbit?


(Man, get used to seeing that headline everywhere if the film doesn’t meet expectations.)

Am I the only one who has seriously downgraded his interest in seeing Peter Jackson’s The Hobbit? Look, nearly EVERYBODY loved The Lord of the Rings. However, The Hobbit is meant to be a much less epic, child-friendly tale.

Instead, we have a comparatively slight book being turned into three (!!!) movies. Three. Now, that’s on the studio, who understandably wants to wring every dollar from the project. However, it’s when I heard about it that my interest first started waning.

However, it’s on Jackson–and this caused my interest to wane quite¬† a bit more–that he made the first chapter of this already bloated-by-trilogy production nearly three hours long. C’mon’, that’s crazy. By the end, The Hobbit trilogy will be nearly as long as the Lord of the Rings trilogy, and that makes no damn sense.

Yes, yes, Jackson’s also including stuff from the Silmerillian. Whatever. Still way too long.

I started having flashbacks to Jackson’s massively overstuffed and underwhelming version of King Kong. There was great stuff in that, but there was awful stuff too (that dinosaur stampede scene nearly killed the movie for me), and way too much of it. I’ll admit this is a personal bugaboo of mine, that films are nearly constantly longer now then they need to be. Even so, Jackson needs to hire someone to stand behind him and whisper “Thou art mortal” in his ear once in a while. Maybe we

Lord of the Rings was very long, but it had to be. The story was so gigantic that Jackson still had to cut a crapload¬† stuff, which presumably forced him to pare down the films to the most important material. Those films, like Gone with the Wind, demonstrated that long doesn’t itself equal bloated.

But eight-plus hours of The Hobbit? Yeesh. I should note that I’m not saying I won’t see it. It’s just that I’ve lowered the bar on my expectations quite a while. This film will have to convince me to see the next two.