As I was writing my review of “The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug” in my head after leaving the theater, I realized I was going to sound more like someone who’s complaining about the movie rather than reviewing it. So be it. Watching these films has become a chore.
Would it surprise you to know Orcs march, heroes hike across vast stretches of land, and Gandalph the Grey cannot speak without sounding like he’s issuing a death edict? The guy could make stepping behind a tree to relieve oneself of a tankard of ale sound like a walk to the gallows.
If we count the “Lord of the Rings” movies, this is the fifth film based on J. R. R. Tolkien’s Middle-earth novels Peter Jackson has directed. I enjoyed the three “Lord of the Rings” movies. The quest of a Hobbit to toss a ring into a pit of lava and defeat an evil spirit named Sauron had enough weight and girth to support three exciting movies. The novel, “The Hobbit,” however, for all of its charm and classic storytelling, does not. That’s not Tolkien’s fault, it’s the fault of a movie studio and a director who looked at the thin tome and said, “Sure, we can stretch this thing into a nine-hour film trilogy.”
With “The Desolution of Smaug,” they stretch it so thin, it becomes as transparent as bubble gum about to pop, and there’s still one film to go.
The plot, such as it is: Thorin Oakenshield and his band of dwarves continue their quest to reach and reclaim their mountain home, over which Oakenshield is the rightful king. There’s a problem, though: A dragon guards the treasure the mountain contains – one that’s not open to negotiating the surrender of a single coin. Oakenshield is less interested in the treasure than he is the Arkenstone, a gem that will allow him to reclaim his throne. (I considered titling this review “Raiders of the Lost Arkenstone,” but that would have associated this movie with one capable of generating a pulse in viewers.) To acquire the Arkenstone, Thorin intends to employ the talents of Bilbo Baggins, the Hobbit to which the title of the book and the movies refers. He’s an excellent thief, or is presumed to be.
To make sure there’s enough material for a nearly three-hour movie, Jackson and his team of writers invent several characters and introduce subplots of dubious dramatic worth, including an elf-dwarf love interest that not only doesn’t appear in the novel but goes against the grain of the universe Tolkien created. “The Desolation of Smaug” is actually rife with inconsistencies and bad logic. In one scene, Gandalph runs from a dozen Orcs; in another, he boldly enters their stronghold, knowing there are hundreds of them. I also wondered how Oakenshield was able to surf along a river of molten gold on a metal sled.
The most laborious additions to the movie in terms of watching the thing are the goings-on in Lake-town, a small village overseen by an odious Master. The town’s only source of gainful employment seems to be spying for the guy. For some unknown reason, the Master dislikes the Bard, whose only crime is making sure the town’s citizens have enough to eat.
I could go on...but you get the point. One point I haven’t made is how the movie does occassionally spring to life. Smaug is a masterpiece of computer animation, and Bilbo’s encounter with the dragon is memorable. I also liked the scene in which Biblo figures out how to unlock the door to the dwarven mountain. In fact, I enjoyed the movie when it was focused on its title character, and not wandering all over Middle-earth in search of a thicker book. Unfortunately, Bilbo is often absent from his own tale, shoved aside by so much goop.
“The Hobbit” was originally going to be a two-part movie, but we’ve still got one more to go. The third installment, “There and Back Again,” will be in theaters next December. I could not be less excited.
Two-and-a-half stars out of four. Rated PG-13 for for extended sequences of intense fantasy action violence, and frightening images.